My first thought is to clarify exactly what my position is. I've heard various things (somebody I was acquainted with was apparently denied a warrant because he was an atheist, but we all knew it was because he was a bit of a paedophile) and it's all been in the media a few times recently.


But I really needed to know where I stood, so I fired off this email to their general purpose contact address:


Hello,

I am currently in the process of becoming an Assistant Leader in my Scout troop, after having been a Junior Leader in the Explorers. I have been in the Worldwide Brotherhood (or is it 'Family' now?) of Scouting since age 6.

It has recently been stated in various news sources (reliable, I would hope) that the Scouts consider faith to be an essential part of leadership, and as such that anyone wanting to obtain a warrant must, during interview, declare belief in something before progressing to the next stages.

It is hard to explain in non-faith based terms, but I am an atheist; because I choose to live my life without a belief in a higher power of any kind, and because I see no evidence to suggest the existence of one in the face of (what I consider to be) insurmountable evidence against the idea.

I would just like to hear from the Scouts what the actual policy is? I have searched for the wording but can't find it, could you please tell me what my position is and how I can go about ensuring that I can carry on doing what I love and being a part of the Scouts, which I consider to be a massive force for good and equality in this country.

In double quick time I received a reply (I wouldn't expect anything less from an organisation which is so prepared) in which they thanked me for my email. Amusingly it was from somebody called Helen Church, and here is the first part of what it said:

We ask that Adult Leaders, and other Adult members of the Association believe in a higher being so that they can help the Young People under their care to fulfil the promise they make as Scouts. For this reason the avowed absence of religious belief is a bar to appointment to a Leadership position. Those who cannot take the promise, such as yourself, can become Associate Members.

This can be read two ways; the right way and the other way which reflects the Scouts' position and is particularly dense. Firstly, they say that I must believe in a higher power in order to facilitate the kid's 'promise', i.e. the bit where they say that they will do their duty to God.

Personally I quite like the wording, if only because a lot of people probably don't feel that they owe any 'duty' to God, so wouldn't be lying. But when you consider that a March 2011 poll by YouGov for the BHA (here) had 56% of 18-24 year olds stating that they had no religion, it's clear that a healthy proportion of young Scouts must be lying when they declare their belief in God through the promise.

That alone makes the Scout Association's claim rather shaky. "But they've promised it, so we have to make sure they receive the requisite amount of indoctrination" seems to be the form. No Scout is going to really bother about what they say in the promise, they couldn't give two fucks about religion, they're much too busy throwing worms at each other.

The other way I read it was that it is essential that I help a Scout to fulfil their promise, as in potential, and it would seem that the Scout Association believes that this can only be done by including faith in the kid's education. I hold a strong belief that any of the benefits afforded by an education that features faith can also be gained by an education that doesn't, and that faith does not have a monopoly on morality.

I'll be saying as much in my reply. But what about this purgatory they mention, that of becoming an 'Associate Member'? Here's what that entails:

Associate members are Adults who support Scouting in the same way as others but they don't have to take their promise. As long as a person is happy to support the fundamentals of Scouting, including the religious policy, they can become Associate Members. They can wear uniform - although they cannot wear the world membership badge. Without being a full member there are barriers to particular roles, for example they can become Sectional Assistants, but not Section Leaders.

I like the promise. I want to take it but disagree with the inclusion of God, so this isn't enough for me. But look at how they mock those without faith; you can't wear a badge, you can only occupy junior positions, you have to agree to their policy on religion? How is this an alternative? It's insulting, frankly, as well as both snide and pathetic.

For an organisation that prides itself on the values of inclusion and equality, this response is blinkered at best, and discriminatory at its worst. It forces kids to lie (itself in direct contravention of multiple parts of the Scout Law) and it approaches the very tricky subject of faith with an undeniable bias. 

The kids should choose, we should at least afford them that amount of respect. And to those who say that they aren't mature enough to make that decision, I present you with the 'Golden Middle Finger' award for gross idiocy and lack of belief in the brilliance of children.