Bsa Unanimously Reaffirms Homosexual Ban

[ERayR]

I have my own litany of faults I perceive in the scouting organization but this decision is not one of them. BSA, in my opinion, taken steps it thinks are necessary for the protection of the majority of the boys it serves. They are in a catch 22 position. If they do nothing and an incident occurs, and in an organization of over 2 million an incident will occur, then their liability is astronomical. By taking the steps they have taken as a part of an educational and safety programs they can show a good faith effort to protect the boys and leaders.

[KevinG]

Sure thing

http://news.yahoo.co...s-29958970.html

http://www.edgeonthe...anti-gay_policy_

http://www.reuters.c...E85D1MM20120614

And maybe I'll throw in one from Canada

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...09/scouts-.html

Right. Pedophiles and perverts target groups like the Scouts so we have to be more diligent in protecting youth. Liberalizing our policy on sexuality in any way is a bad move.

[Wants2know]

I have always thought this a ridiculous ban. It supports idiotic thinking in regards to homosexuality. As such, I have not encouraged my children to participate in the program.

[selek1]

I have always thought this a ridiculous ban. It supports idiotic thinking in regards to homosexuality. As such, I have not encouraged my children to participate in the program.

We thank you for your opinion.

Of course, if "idiotic thinking in regards to homosexuality" were suddenly outlawed, a goodly majority of the pro-homosexual activists would be in hiding for fear of arrest and detention.

[Libs]

I think he means it supports stereotypes about gays that cause a lot of real pain and discrimination.

[selek1]

I think he means it supports stereotypes about gays that cause a lot of real pain and discrimination.

So did I.

[bluebell]

I just read this article on yahoo about men returning their eagle scout awards.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/eagle-scouts-return-medals-over-organization-anti-gay-184508093.html

Some things that stood out to me-

The woman who wrote about her husband sending his medals back and got the whole thing rolling said "I actually have another half-dozen letters that I'm going to post later this week," she said. The men, she writes, are "doing something really honest, and really respectable, and really brave...."

I can understand her feelings about it, but i can't understand what is so 'very brave' about what these men are doing?

Given the attitude of most of the media on the topic, these men (though i absolutely do not doubt their sincerity) actually seem to be taking the most popular path available to them, and one that will have no negative impact upon their lives in the least. Where exactly is the bravery in that?

I also loved the BSA's response to these men-

"Earlier this month, spokesperson Deron Smith said that a committee of Scout executives and adult volunteers was unanimous in its decision to keep the anti-gay policy. The committee, Smith said, represented "a diversity of perspectives and opinions."

We reached out via email to the Boy Scouts of America for a comment. Spokesman Smith responded: "Scouting represents millions of youth and adult members in diverse communities across the nation, each with a variety of beliefs about this issue. While a majority of our membership agrees with our policy, no single policy will accommodate the many diverse views among our membership or society. Although we are disappointed to learn of anyone who feels compelled to return his Eagle rank, we fully understand and appreciate that not everyone will agree with any one position or policy."

Smith continued: "The BSA values the freedom of everyone to express their opinion. We expect all members to respect all other viewpoints and opinions....The BSA does not have an agenda on this matter, and its membership policy is not meant to be a blanket statement or a social commentary. The BSA is a voluntary, private organization that sets policies that are best for the organization. We welcome all who share its beliefs but do not criticize or condemn those who wish to follow a different path."

I like that they aren't backpeddling on their position, and also aren't being defensive or snarky.

[cacheman]

I just read this article on yahoo about men returning their eagle scout awards.

http://news.yahoo.co...-184508093.html

Some things that stood out to me-

The woman who wrote about her husband sending his medals back and got the whole thing rolling said "I actually have another half-dozen letters that I'm going to post later this week," she said. The men, she writes, are "doing something really honest, and really respectable, and really brave...."

I can understand her feelings about it, but i can't understand what is so 'very brave' about what these men are doing?

Given the attitude of most of the media on the topic, these men (though i absolutely do not doubt their sincerity) actually seem to be taking the most popular path available to them, and one that will have no negative impact upon their lives in the least. Where exactly is the bravery in that?

Even if the prevailing attitude of the media or the general public is on the side of anti-discrimination in this regard, the men could have social or career environments where statements and actions like theirs could yield negative consequences. Perhaps they work or live in socially conservative environments. Publicly following their conscience regardless of any potential fallout from their actions could be accurately called 'bravery'.

[bluebell]

Even if the prevailing attitude of the media or the general public is on the side of anti-discrimination in this regard, the men could have social or career environments where statements and actions like theirs could yield negative consequences. Perhaps they work or live in socially conservative environments. Publicly following their conscience regardless of any potential fallout from their actions could be accurately called 'bravery'.

But there doesn't seem to be any reason to believe that these men do live or work in such an environment, right?

And what kind of environment could legally or sorcially harm them for no longer being eagle scouts? This thread here is proof that even members of the church-one of the most pro-scouting environments in the U.S.-don't all agree with the BSA's decision and wouldn't really care if they heard another member was turning in their eagle award.

I agree that publically following their conscience regardless of any potential for fallout could be considered 'bravery', but i'm not at all convinced that there is any reasonable reason to assume that such 'potential fallout' exists. In fact, it seems that it's far more reasonable to assume that BSA risks more for following their conscious than these men do.

To me, this woman seems to be using the word brave to simply say 'i agree with them' and not based on any actual threat these men are facing.

[Libs]

I'm really not clear as to why the BSA is continuing their discriminatory policy, if most people (supposedly) are against it?

[bluebell]

I'm really not clear as to why the BSA is continuing their discriminatory policy, if most people (supposedly) are against it?

I don't know that most people are against it. I just think the people that are are more than willing to do whatever they can to negatively impact the BSA for doing something they don't agree with and i also believe they have the media on their side, thus magnifying the impact of their dissent.

[ERayR]

I'm really not clear as to why the BSA is continuing their discriminatory policy, if most people (supposedly) are against it?

I would say most people are not against it. It is only the biased news reporting that has managed to picture it that way.

[Libs]

I would say most people are not against it. It is only the biased news reporting that has managed to picture it that way.

I would guess that the "for or against" is about 50/50, at this point.

I, honestly, do not understand why gays would be excluded from leadership in the BSA, especially, now that there are new rules to better protect the safety of the boys. I had read somewhere that the BSA was going to allow local troops to make that determination for themselves (about gays in leadership). Was that idea tossed out?

[ERayR]

I would guess that the "for or against" is about 50/50, at this point.

I, honestly, do not understand why gays would be excluded from leadership in the BSA, especially, now that there are new rules to better protect the safety of the boys. I had read somewhere that the BSA was going to allow local troops to make that determination for themselves (about gays in leadership). Was that idea tossed out?

I don't know. I am not involved with scouting except that I have a son in scouts. I have my own issues with BSA but it is not with the quality of their program. I think they are not swayed by the politically correct, currently in vogue ideas in this area and are doing all they can for the safety of the boys.

[Pahoran]

I would guess that the "for or against" is about 50/50, at this point.

I, honestly, do not understand why gays would be excluded from leadership in the BSA, especially, now that there are new rules to better protect the safety of the boys. I had read somewhere that the BSA was going to allow local troops to make that determination for themselves (about gays in leadership). Was that idea tossed out?

Boy Scout leadership is largely hands-on. Which really ought to be sufficient to answer the question.

And while there are some who manage to work themselves into a state of high dudgeon by imagining that they are being denied some sort of "right" to have unlimited unsupervised access to teenage boys, for my money the only real right in view is the right of those boys to take a shower without being ogled.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Boy Scout leadership is largely hands-on. Which really ought to be sufficient to answer the question.

And while there are some who manage to work themselves into a state of high dudgeon by imagining that they are being denied some sort of "right" to have unlimited unsupervised access to teenage boys, for my money the only real right in view is the right of those boys to take a shower without being ogled.

Regards,

Pahoran

Every time threads like this pop up I don't understand why people are even critical of the BSA. Would it be a good idea for a guy to be a leader over a pack of girl scouts?

If you think yes, I would love to have a debate and show you why you are so wrong.

This is common sense stuff man. It is not anti-gay. It is common sense. If you are attracted to member's of the same sex how on God's green earth is it a good idea to put you in a potion were you might not exercise self control? If a gay man cannot be a leader of young men what are the chances of something questionable happening? Similarly if a Man cannot be a leader over young women what are the chances of something questionable happening? Well the answer is 0.

Any way you critics just try to talk your self into thinking this is some bigoted act of the BSA. It is called common sense.

[Libs]

Boy Scout leadership is largely hands-on. Which really ought to be sufficient to answer the question.

And while there are some who manage to work themselves into a state of high dudgeon by imagining that they are being denied some sort of "right" to have unlimited unsupervised access to teenage boys, for my money the only real right in view is the right of those boys to take a shower without being ogled.

Regards,

Pahoran

Not sure, exactly what you mean about "hands on"? Hands on the boys?? I was a Cub Scout Leader, for my son's troop (many years ago) and I don't recall even one instance where I had to put my hands on anyone. Really, not a good idea, in this day and age.

As for "oogling"...thus far, it has been heterosexual men who have been the problem....and the BSA, like the Catholic Church, has had more than their share of problems in that area.

[ERayR]

Every time threads like this pop up I don't understand why people are even critical of the BSA. Would it be a good idea for a guy to be a leader over a pack of girl scouts?

If you think yes, I would love to have a debate and show you why you are so wrong.

This is common sense stuff man. It is not anti-gay. It is common sense. If you are attracted to member's of the same sex how on God's green earth is it a good idea to put you in a potion were you might not exercise self control? If a gay man cannot be a leader of young men what are the chances of something questionable happening? Similarly if a Man cannot be a leader over young women what are the chances of something questionable happening? Well the answer is 0.

Any way you critics just try to talk your self into thinking this is some bigoted act of the BSA. It is called common sense.

Right on. I wish I could give 10 rep points for that.

[ERayR]

Not sure, exactly what you mean about "hands on"? Hands on the boys?? I was a Cub Scout Leader, for my son's troop (many years ago) and I don't recall even one instance where I had to put my hands on anyone. Really, not a good idea, in this day and age.

As for "oogling"...thus far, it has been heterosexual men who have been the problem....and the BSA, like the Catholic Church, has had more than their share of problems in that area.

You mean men that self identify as heterosexual. The facts belie that identification. At the very least they are bisexual. As you have indicated there has been more than enough problems with that, it doesn't make sense to not take all the precautions available.

[Libs]

MRSR:

If you're interested...the problem with that argument assumes that people cannot control their sexual urges or that they are attracted to every single person of whatever group it is they are attracted to. The logic implies that any man who is within physical range of any other woman is "oogling" her and thinking sexual thoughts about her. Do you really think that is a fact??

Would it not occur to anyone, that most gay men are not attracted to teenage boys, anymore than most heterosexual men are sexually attracted to young girls?? This is a part of the problem with discussions like these....double standards and stereotypes abound.

P.S. It is NOT common logic. Not at all, if you really think it through.

[Tacenda]

MRSR:

If you're interested...the problem with that argument assumes that people cannot control their sexual urges or that they are attracted to every single person of whatever group it is they are attracted to. The logic implies that any man who is within physical range of any other woman is "oogling" her and thinking sexual thoughts about her. Do you really think that is a fact??

Would it not occur to anyone, that most gay men are not attracted to teenage boys, anymore than most heterosexual men are sexually attracted to young girls?? This is a part of the problem with discussions like these....double standards and stereotypes abound.

P.S. It is NOT common logic. Not at all, if you really think it through.

Ok first time for everything, how do I give rep points? This comment is perfect, Libs. Love the thought about straight men not being sexually attracted to young girls, why should we think gays are always going to be sexually attracted to young boys!

Now onward to figuring out how to give rep points for Libs!!!

[Verum]

Every time threads like this pop up I don't understand why people are even critical of the BSA. Would it be a good idea for a guy to be a leader over a pack of girl scouts?

Of course not, because currently, Boy Scouts doesn't allow men to be leaders over girl scouts, or women to be leaders over boy scouts right?

Or wait...yes they do...

http://en.wikipedia.....America)<br />

http://www.scouting..../GSS/gss03.aspx

[ERayR]

MRSR:

If you're interested...the problem with that argument assumes that people cannot control their sexual urges or that they are attracted to every single person of whatever group it is they are attracted to. The logic implies that any man who is within physical range of any other woman is "oogling" her and thinking sexual thoughts about her. Do you really think that is a fact??

Would it not occur to anyone, that most gay men are not attracted to teenage boys, anymore than most heterosexual men are sexually attracted to young girls?? This is a part of the problem with discussions like these....double standards and stereotypes abound.

P.S. It is NOT common logic. Not at all, if you really think it through.

Ahh but the likelihood of that attraction being there is much greater. A young enticing young man is likely to be attractive. As for young men who have ssa - well it is not a good idea to put them in places where they can act on those attractions.

You obviously don't understand that there is a big problem with heterosexual males being attracted to teenage girls. There have been televised sting operations exposing these activities. It is just that most know it is improper and control their urges and do what they need to to not be put in situations that are improper.

The BSA is doing all they can to keep from putting homosexual men and boys in improper circumstances.

[ERayR]

Ok first time for everything, how do I give rep points? This comment is perfect, Libs. Love the thought about straight men not being sexually attracted to young girls, why should we think gays are always going to be sexually attracted to young boys!

Now onward to figuring out how to give rep points for Libs!!!

You are naive in the ultimate if you don't think there is an attraction. See my post # 98. There was a scene in a movie about an an older grandpa type helping a young girl get cross country to her home. In a motel, where they had stopped for the night, room she sheds her shirt and heads for the shower. The grandpa type tells her she shouldn't do that and she replies with "why your old enough to be my grandpa". He replies with "but I'm not your grandpa".

They don't always have to be attracted, it only takes one, two or a small percentage.

Don't let your politically correct ideology get in the way of common sense.

[Libs]

Ahh but the likelihood of that attraction being there is much greater.

I think, if I asked you to prove that, you could not (at least, not from any objective study). This is exactly what I am talking about, in regards to stereotyping.

A young enticing young man is likely to be attractive. As for young men who have ssa - well it is not a good idea to put them in places where they can act on those attractions.

Then, perhaps, they should all be locked away from decent society.

You obviously don't understand that there is a big problem with heterosexual males being attracted to teenage girls. There have been televised sting operations exposing these activities. It is just that most know it is improper and control their urges and do what they need to to not be put in situations that are improper.

Do you honestly believe this is typical behavior of MOST heterosexual men?? It's not, ERay.

The BSA is doing all they can to keep from putting homosexual men and boys in improper circumstances.

I don't think grown men of any orientation should, necessarily be showering with young boys, but that is for their protection, as well as the protection of the boys. It's not because MOST men (hetero or otherwise) are attracted to young boys, but rather to protect from the exceptional man who IS (hetero or otherwise).