It anticipates a diversity of views. Views fiercely held and openly expressed.

Sometimes it works.

The school district’s April 10 discussion about the Boy Scouts was such an occasion.

Listen to WSUI’s overnight broadcasts of BBC news. Debates elsewhere  about issues of no greater divisiveness can and do lead to decades-long civil wars.

Not only was our community’s discussion devoid of physical attack, it was even polite.

Notwithstanding the diversity of issues, and even greater diversity of views, a couple hundred people carried on a discussion that actually helped produce a constructive solution to a very difficult problem.

There were legal issues. Can a school district make buildings available to community groups after school, and then choose groups on the basis of  their beliefs?

Are legal issues even relevant? Most thought so. Why take money from educational programs to fight lawsuits we will probably lose anyway?

But there were jokes about lawyers and some suggestions law is irrelevant.

The District should be courageous enough to do what is “morally right.”

So what’s morally right? Some believe their religion teaches homosexuality is morally wrong. That’s the national Boy Scouts’ belief. Others say it’s morally wrong to backslide on the civil rights progress represented by the district’s anti-discrimination policy that includes “sexual orientation.”

It is the conflict between this district policy and that of the national Boy Scouts that required the community forum in the first place.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the state of New Jersey cannot forbid the Boy Scouts’ membership policy. Something the court calls “expressive association” gives them First Amendment protection.

But the court didn’t say the Scouts have a constitutional right to promote their organization in schools, with students, during school hours.

“Creationists” are people opposed to the theory of evolution. Like the national Boy Scouts, creationists have full First Amendment rights to hold and express their views – in the creationists’ case an interpretation of the Bible.

Creationists can meet after hours in school buildings. They can try to persuade school boards to include creationism in the curriculum – as they succeeded in doing in Kansas. They do not, however, have the right to enter a biology classroom to express those views, over the protests of the teachers and administrators, just because the school is a public building.

There were even legal issues involving the Board’s governance model. All former “board policies” are now “administrative regulations.” Is this an exception? The Board quickly agreed to an innovative resolution. The Superintendent will draft the new policy as an administrative regulation.

The Board will review it and may create an additional executive limitation.

On the merits, even the Scouts’ spokespersons held diverse views. Some support the national policy, believing that homosexuals are inconsistent with – or even a risk to – the Scouts. Some oppose national’s policy, but want to work quietly and personally to change it. Some think it’s irrelevant to what the local Scouts organizations are doing.

One of the most eloquent statements came from a young Boy Scout. He believes national’s policy is contrary to the Scouts’ other teachings and that it causes great harm to young persons who are gay. He believes the policy will not be “changed from within” until public bodies take a strong stand against it.

Throughout the evening this incredible array of issues and views was presented with a remarkable degree of sensitivity, respect and civility.

Board members participated, instead of either sitting mute or suggesting “my mind is made up, don’t confuse me with the facts.”

Gradually, bits of consensus began to emerge.

What’s next?

The Board could have chosen to walk blindly into this minefield of explosive legal issues. Instead, it’s calmly looking to legal counsel.

We don’t yet know the outcome. Will everyone be happy with it? Of course not. That never was democracy’s promise.

But democracy’s potential has been powerfully demonstrated in our community once again.

Nicholas Johnson is an Iowa City School Board member. More information is available on his Web site www.nicholasjohnson.org.