Daughters of the American Revolution Upholds Inclusion Policy for Transgender Members

Daughters of the American Revolution Upholds Inclusion Policy for Transgender Members

The Daughters of the American Revolution, a historic society dedicated to the principles of patriotism and historical preservation, recently voted against a proposal aimed at restricting transgender individuals from joining their ranks. This decision, made over the weekend, reflects the organization’s ongoing commitment to inclusivity.

The DAR, which has permitted natal males to join its chapters across the country, emphasized that retaining this policy is crucial for maintaining its tax-exempt status. A local chapter in Texas, supported by the Center for American Liberty, argued against this rationale. However, the National Board of Management rejected their motions during a recent vote.

Reactions to the Board’s Decision

Laura McDonald, a member of the Martha Laird DAR Chapter, expressed her disappointment regarding the board’s refusal to amend their bylaws. She commented, “The rejection by the National Board of Management of our proposal to define a woman in our bylaws sadly confirms what we knew all along – that leadership is taking a political stance which is not based on fears of the loss of 501(c)(3) nonprofit status. We are indebted to The Center for American Liberty for their help in exposing this truth. We will continue fighting for the Truth.”

The proposed amendment sought to define a woman strictly as a biological female, thereby excluding anyone not meeting this criterion. The controversy surrounding the issue has sparked discussions about gender identity and organizational bylaws.

Legal Arguments and Future Proposals

In January, the Center for American Liberty submitted a letter to DAR leadership, asserting that the exclusion of natal men from membership would not compromise the organization’s nonprofit status. The Martha Laird Chapter, with support from eleven additional chapters, submitted a new proposal intending to modify the bylaws to restrict trans-identifying men from membership.

The suggested amendment included a specific definition of a woman, stating, “A woman is defined as a biological female at conception, having naturally occurring X chromosomes, exclusive of Y chromosomes, and certified as female or girl on the original birth certificate.” Despite the rejection of this proposal, McDonald has plans for a revised amendment in March. “The language of the new proposal will accommodate the concerns the NBOM addressed in their rejection letter,” she explained.

The National Board of Management’s Stand

According to documents shared with Fox News Digital, the National Board of Management concluded that the proposed amendments were unsuitable for inclusion in their bylaws. They noted that the current approach would continue to accept state-certified birth certificates without the requirement for chromosomal DNA tests to verify an applicant’s sex.

McDonald has emphasized that the chapter will persist in pursuing an inclusive discussion until they receive a vote at the Continental Congress. She asserts that transparency and fairness are essential in addressing these membership criteria.

First Amendment Rights at Stake

The Center for American Liberty presented arguments highlighting the First Amendment rights of the organization to exclude trans-identifying males. They contend that enforcing a requirement to admit these individuals could interfere with DAR’s ability to convey its message. Furthermore, legal experts argue that imposing such requirements could jeopardize the organization’s status as a nonprofit.

Critics of the organization’s decision argue they could face significant ramifications, impacting the fabric of the society founded for women by women. McDonald noted that the organization’s foundational principles have always centered around inclusivity in a specific context, which, according to her, has been altered in recent years.

Historical Context of DAR and Its Membership Criteria

Established in 1890, the Daughters of the American Revolution provides a home for women focused on honoring the patriots of the Revolutionary War and promoting heritage. The organization has historically limited membership to those who can trace their lineage back to individuals involved in the fight for American independence.

Critics of the recent bylaw changes assert that the foundation of the organization revolves around principles that should not shift with societal changes. Former member Brenda Becker resigned in protest over new policies which she believed contradicted the society’s original objectives. She argued that the claims regarding membership eligibility are inconsistent, particularly concerning the definition of womanhood.

Widespread Member Concern

Since announcing the amendment to accept members based on altered birth certificates, more than 500 members and ex-members have expressed their dissatisfaction through nearly 3,000 communications to board leadership. Those opposed to the changes fear they may ultimately be compelled to share personal facilities with biological males, undermining the foundation of a women-centric organization.

Becker voiced her feelings of betrayal, noting the irony in the adoption of altered birth certificates when strict biographical accuracy has historically been a prerequisite for DAR membership. This contradiction highlights a deeper concern within the membership regarding organizational integrity.

Paving the Way Forward

As the Daughters of the American Revolution navigates these contentious issues, the future remains uncertain. The upcoming voting session in March presents an opportunity for the Martha Laird Chapter to propose a new amendment that seeks to balance tradition with contemporary inclusivity debates.

What remains clear is that this pivotal moment in DAR’s history extends beyond mere membership policies; it encompasses broader societal discussions surrounding gender identity, inclusion, and the responsibilities of organizations committed to preserving history while adapting to modern contexts.

As discussions continue, the organization may well find itself at the center of an escalating national conversation regarding women’s rights and the definition of gender in a rapidly evolving society.