What ever happened to common sense? What happened to those truths we all held to be self-evident?
Not long ago, it seemed parents could send their children out the door, trusting that the mainstream cultural institutions in their community world would reinforce the basic tenets taught at home. Things like work hard, tell the truth, respect others, take responsibility, do unto others as you would have then do unto you. The so-called secular spaces like public schools, media, the press, the local library, could be counted on to at least not overtly undermine a family's basic values, approaching the world from a neutral perspective.
But popular entertainment increasingly trades timeless stories about courage, sacrifice, and friendship for thinly veiled lessons in identity and self-expression. The MLB aggressively celebrates pride month, including games featuring pride themed uniforms. The Super Bowl Halftime show is a politically charged event and far from family-friendly. And as a cherry on top, your favorite actor is probably tweeting about politics again for some reason.
Whatever happened to those open, “neutral” spaces where people could simply get along? Agree to disagree? Whatever happened to the professional, moderate, decent figures and spaces that used to provide us all with a shared sense of identity and stability?
The truth is, there are no neutral spaces. There never were. Every classroom, every program, every voice in a child’s life is telling a story about what is true, what is good, and what a life is for.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident.” So goes the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence, penned 250 years ago this July. But our founders could talk of self-evident truths not because the truths were objectively self-evident. They were, in many ways, evident precisely because the men who affirmed them shared a common moral and cultural inheritance. Of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, the overwhelming majority (53) were Protestant Christians. One was Catholic. Even Thomas Jefferson—later labeled a deist—was, at the time, still attending an Episcopal church. Differences certainly existed, but there remained a shared core for their understanding of truth, virtue, and human purpose rooted in a broadly Christian worldview. In other words, what appeared “self-evident” was only such because of a shared foundation.
A common source. A common sense. And from that shared foundation, unity was possible. The famous American motto, “Out of many, one” (E pluribus unum)— was not meant to insinuate that the founders agreed on everything, but rather that they agreed on what matters most, and could therefore stand as one, despite their differences.
In a New York Post op-ed earlier this year, Leonard Sax talked about the importance of moral neutrality and highlighted the growth of Trail Life and the shift in Scouting America. He lamented that it has become harder for parents to find spaces for their children that feel truly neutral. He described a growing divide in American culture—one that increasingly forces families to choose between competing moral and ideological frameworks.
There’s an assumption present in Sax’s article that reflects a broader cultural attitude that explicit adherence to particular moral perspectives is unnecessary or even undesirable. We imagine that neutrality can bind us together, or at least allow us to coexist in harmony.
But that assumption deserves closer examination. While the division Sax identifies may feel new, the need to choose is not.
Every institution that seeks to shape young people—schools, youth programs, teams, and communities—must operate from some understanding of truth, morality, and human purpose. There has never been such a thing as a truly “apolitical” space when it comes to forming character. Nature abhors a vacuum. A value system will emerge. The only question is: which one?
Sax rightly emphasizes that parents want their children to become the best men and women they can be. He encourages families, where possible, to seek out environments that are “diverse, welcoming, and apolitical.” Yet he also acknowledges the growing difficulty of that task, as institutions increasingly reflect sharply different moral visions.
That tension reveals something deeper. What we are witnessing is not simply a rise in political division, but the erosion of a shared moral consensus that once undergirded American life.
For generations, many of our institutions—whether explicitly or implicitly—drew from a broadly biblical understanding of truth, virtue, and human dignity. The Boy Scouts of America may not have been directly affiliated throughout most of its history with any particular religion, but it was always clearly moral. Robert Baden Powell said that “Scouting is nothing more than Christianity applied.” While, certainly, not every Scout or leader professed faith in the God of the Bible (or in any deity, for that matter), the Christian underpinnings foundationally shaped the program and the values it promoted.
Over time, however, many institutions attempted to redefine themselves apart from those roots. In doing so, they did not become neutral. They simply exchanged one moral framework for another. Secular humanism, like any worldview, carries its own assumptions about truth, identity, and purpose. It is not an absence of belief; it is a belief system of its own with its own convictions about identity, truth, and what it means to live well. If you don’t believe me, just try walking onto a college campus and arguing that moral truth does not vary from person to person or even culture to culture and see how quickly you’re met with some intense moral certainty.
When Trail Life USA was founded, it was not an effort to enter a political contest or carve out a new ideological lane. It was a decision to remain anchored in a moral foundation that had long guided the formation of young men. The goal was simple: to provide a place where character is built on something steady, something tested, something true.
Character cannot be formed in shifting sand. Boys are far more perceptive than we sometimes give them credit for. They can sense when values are treated as flexible, when standards seem to change with outside pressure, or when leaders appear uncertain about what they believe. That kind of instability erodes trust.
The building of character requires consistency. It requires leaders and institutions that demonstrate coherence over time—where what is taught today will still be true tomorrow.
The appeal of neutrality is understandable. In a divided culture, it is tempting to imagine spaces where differences can simply be set aside. But when it comes to raising children, neutrality is not a stable foundation. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “On matters of style, swim with the current; on matters of principle, stand like a rock.” You simply cannot build character without defining what is good, what is true, and what is worth pursuing.
At Trail Life, we believe those answers are not arbitrary or temporary. They are rooted in timeless truths—truths that do not shift with cultural trends or political winds.
Far from dividing, that kind of clarity provides a common ground strong enough to unite people across superficial differences. It’s what makes the old motto e pluribus unum possible. It has the power to break down racial and political divides. It gives people something firm to stand on and strive toward together. Vague commitments to be nice, diverse, inclusive, and apolitical can’t achieve that. They never have.
Sax argued that, “As a parent, your first priority has to be to help your child to fulfill his or her potential, to become the best man or woman they can be.” If we truly want to help our children reach their full potential, we must give them more than open-ended ideals. We must give them a foundation.
Because in the end, the question is not whether our children will be shaped—but by what.
Find a Troop near you or Learn how to bring Trail Life to your community at TrailLifeUSA.com
