Bsa Considering Ending Ban On Homosexuals

[DavidB]

Thank you ERay. My son just barely started the scouting program, and I'm new to it. I'm don't think that the church would send anyone on a co-ed camp out, and if they did, we would opt out. If the church does not do co-ed campouts, then it will probably also not have gay leaders take them on a camp out, so there's probably no concern for me. I don't think there is anything wrong with treating gay men as you would a female leader - ie - they should not use the same bathroom as the boys, they should not be bunking with the boys etc. etc. I really don't hate gay people, I have gay fb friends, and gay relatives. Call me old fashioned, but I just think it's inappropriate to have anyone who might be sexually attracted to one another go on a camp out. I have a girl scout too, and the same would go for her, I would not send her on a co-ed camp out, or place her with anyone who is sexually attracted to females either.

If anyone is intersted, this is the email I got, and then responded to:

"Venturing is a youth development program of the Boy Scouts of America for young men and women who are 14 years of age OR 13 years of age and have completed the eighth grade and under 21 years of age. Venturing's purpose is to provide positive experiences to help young people mature and to prepare them to become responsible and caring adults."

In my ward the boys are Ventures at age 14. I am sure there are LDS troops at jambores ....the point I am trying stress is that LDS boys already go on co-ed campouts or are on campouts or at activities with individuals who identify as having homosexual desires.

The letter you received to forward, is misinformed and lacks an understanding of current Scout programs both in the US and Worldwide.

Edited February 3, 2013 by DavidB

[california boy]

For me, what the BSA ends up doing is probably what the church wants it to do. The Mormon church is so important to the continued success and even survival of BSA. I personally think that is is entirely possible that this sudden change in direction may have even been prompted by the church. More and more gay boys are coming out early in life because they know that they do not have to hide in secrecy their orientation. So what does the church want to do with a gay member? Prevent them from going to any scouting (young mens) activity? Does any member really want to exclude a gay young man from participating in the scouting program? If you kick him out of scouting which is all young men activities, do you really think they will stay active in the church? Is that the result the church wants? Just my opinion. I have nothing to support this belief except the compassion the church is showing towards its gay members.

[california boy]

Thank you ERay. My son just barely started the scouting program, and I'm new to it. I'm don't think that the church would send anyone on a co-ed camp out, and if they did, we would opt out. If the church does not do co-ed campouts, then it will probably also not have gay leaders take them on a camp out, so there's probably no concern for me. I don't think there is anything wrong with treating gay men as you would a female leader - ie - they should not use the same bathroom as the boys, they should not be bunking with the boys etc. etc. I really don't hate gay people, I have gay fb friends, and gay relatives. Call me old fashioned, but I just think it's inappropriate to have anyone who might be sexually attracted to one another go on a camp out. I have a girl scout too, and the same would go for her, I would not send her on a co-ed camp out, or place her with anyone who is sexually attracted to females either.

If anyone is intersted, this is the email I got, and then responded to:

I think you need to educate yourself a little about pedophiles. They can be both gay and straight. All straight pedophiles do not exclusively molests little girls. Straight pedophiles can and do also molest boys. You have probably read about the Penn State coach that was molesting little boys. He was not gay. He was straight. There is nothing in his life that has ever indicated that he was even the least bit gay. To think that only gay pedophiles molest boys and straight pedophiles only molest little girls is a very dangerous assumption. Pedophiles molest children of both sexes and who they molest has noting to do with their sexual orientation. I seriously doubt you would be comfortable letting Sandusky become a scout leader just because he is not gay.

The point is, what is the most effective way of protecting our young men is to ALWAYS insist on two deep leadership and making sure every adult leader keeps a close eye on the other adult leader. That is what is going to be effective in preventing inappropriate behavior. Keeping gays from being scoutmasters has not and will not prevent inappropriate behavior that can occur.

[DavidB]

As early as 1994 Mit Romney supported gays in Scouts, and he support the right of BSA to make the call. As recently as August 2012, a Romney spokes person said this remains his current position.

What would people say if Romney was President and he supported the BSA in the proposed change. It is funny how perspectives have to change when the more information that is provided.

At least one group claimed the proposed change a bowing to strong-arm tactics, but I think such characterization is just emotionally driver craftiness designed to blind others from stepping back and considering all aspects of the issue.

Edited February 3, 2013 by DavidB

[DavidB]

LDS participation in 22nd World Jamboree review the pictures ... Edited February 3, 2013 by DavidB

[gkearney]

Perhaps the church should start sex segregated schools. Do we need to go back to segregated public toilets as well ony this time ones for gays as opposed to blacks?

I hate to break the news to you but the church already does coed camping at youth conferences and on those oh so popular pioneer treks you are so fond of in the states.

[DavidB]

I hate to break the news to you but the church already does coed camping at youth conferences and on those oh so popular pioneer treks you are so fond of in the states.

Lol, good point.

[california boy]

As early as 1994 Mit Romney supported gays in Scouts, and he support the right of BSA to make the call. As recently as August 2012, a Romney spokes person said this remains his current position.

What would people say if Romney was President and he supported the BSA in the proposed change. It is funny how perspectives have to change when the more information that is provided.

At least one group claimed the proposed change a bowing to strong-arm tactics, but I think such characterization is just emotionally driver craftiness designed to blind others from stepping back and considering all aspects of the issue.

Obama: "Yes," Boy Scouts should allow gay members

President Obama responded with a simple "Yes" when he was asked on Sunday by CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley whether the Boy Scouts of America should open their organization to openly gay members.

His reason? "My attitude is that gays and lesbians should have access and opportunity the same way everybody else does, in every institution and walk of life."

"The Scouts are a great institution that are promoting young people and exposing them to opportunities and leadership that will serve people for the rest of their lives," Mr. Obama continued, "And I think nobody should be barred from that."

[kllindley]

CFR on this statement.

http://www.springsofwater.com/2013/02/03/avowed/

For one.

[Saints Alive]

http://www.springsofwater.com/2013/02/03/avowed/

For one.

um... No.

[changed]

"just as you wouldn't have women leaders on camp-outs with our boys,"

Based on the fear many are expressing, the church should segregate all classes based on gender. Males 2 deep with the classroom door ajar only every teach a males, females teach females.

A little bit ago they were talking about putting windows in all the classroom doors, and we do have a policy of not allowing any male teachers to be with a class on their own, and not just the male teachers, more and more of our classes now have 2 instead of one teacher, and it's not just to protect the kids, it's to protect the adults from whatever accusations might come their way. I think generally parents come on camp outs with the kids in our ward too. It's really really sad that it has to come to this, but it's better to be safe than sorry. It seems like there is a lot more molestation going on, perhaps the internet is polluting everyone minds too much? I don't know... I have two close relatives right now who are involved in two different unrelated brutal incidents - it's common enough that it's not just what I read about in the papers anymore, it's happening to people I know and love. ... at testimony meeting today this poor little girl got up and said their school play was making fun of kids who were "prude". I'm tired of seeing the message that sexual immorality is ok, that you are a bigot if you don't celebrate and accept it, embrace it, condone it. I've seen too many people who get hurt because of that message.

[Flyonthewall]

Gay scout leaders would not be as big an issue as gay scouts. If I may put my thoughts down...(sorry, the first part was posted accidently before it was finished)

The only time there would be an issue at all is on camp outs.

There have been molestations by leaders before, and I do not know how many of those were by gay leaders...if any.

Gay scouts would be a different issue, only on camp outs.

Where do you you put them?

Do you have a gay scout in with a straight scout?

I'm thinking if a boy of scout age has already determined that he is gay, and has "come out", then he would definately have a same-sex attraction, and having him tent with another male is just awkward for one, or both.

I would liken this to a co-ed pairing where one is not attracted to the other. This would/should never happen on a campout.

Yes there have been co-ed campouts at jamborees, but I would be there were no co-ed tent sharing going on.

Would you have a gay scout tent with another gay scout?

I would liken this to a co-ed pairng which would be inappropriate at best. I don't care if the 2 paired were as good as good can be, it would/should never happen.

To me it would not matter if the gay person has never acted on their sexual attraction or not...same thing if there was a co-ed straight pairing and neither of them had acted out on their sexual attractions...it would not be appropriate.

Now I'm not insinuating gay people are not in control of their behavior, but they would still be teenagers, and teenagers....well they just aren't always on their best behavior.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Flyonthewall

[DavidB]

Changed, what does any of that have to do with a whether a scout is attracted to boys or girls? The person who originated the email to you does not understand the scouting program. While the LDS Church does not coed Scouting the BSA does have coed Scouting. Straight kids are around gay kids or kids who think they are gay. Basically what the email is promoting is that males and females are incapable of being around each without turning the event into a debauchery festival, and if straight people can not comingle without turning the gathering into a fornication festival then most certainly those who identify as have homosexual thoughts are even more likely to commit folly with any member of the same sex.

[kllindley]

Actually there are studies that demonstrate that this is not true, though I haven't yet come across a study that dealt with actual offense (that homosexuals are more likely percentagewise to be actual molestors, in sheer numbers there are many more heterosexual abusers out there just because there are many more heterosexuals in the population) rather than just attraction:

http://www.tandfonli...926239208404356

However, the studies I viewed were twenty years old and perhaps there are better more recent ones out there that prove them wrong.

I'm not familiar with the older research (age bias, I guess), so I'm not in a position to refute it. However, the recent work I am aware of does indicates that gay men are no more likely to be sexually aroused by boys than straight men are to be aroused by girls. This article: http://springerlink.com/content/l2v8761372637p15/ presents well construcetd research that supports that conclusion.

This data suggests that attractions to various ages (Pre-pubescent, pubescent, or post-pubescent) are distinct categories of attraction as much as sex.

I also want to address the assertion that a "gay" pedophile (meaning a man who is attracted to prepubescent boys) is more likely to be attracted to prepubescent boys than a "straight" pedophile (defined as a man who is attracted to prepubescent girls). I can't argue with that. It is a self-supporting statement. I don't think that anyone is suggesting the BSA change its policy to include individuals with sexual attractions to pre-pubescent boys. We're talking about a policy that as currently worded and enforced, exludes faithful Latter-Day Saints who are worthy for any other calling in the Church (Bishop, Stake President, Apostle).

[kllindley]

um... No.

I will readily admit to being unfamilliar with the protocol of this particualr forum. Please help me understand, as I am not aware of a social context in which "um... No." is a cogent response to request for CFR.

[Calm]

This article: http://springerlink....7p15/��presents well construcetd research that supports that conclusion.

Your link just took me to the home page.

Try this one (for some reason the 'hidden' url reference was the correct one so I just copied that and it took me to this one):

http://link.springer...0508-010-9675-3

Maybe it's the time of night, but I am not getting in the abstract where it says what you claim nor in the summary and conclusions. Could you point me to where in the article itself that it states this. Thank you.

Edited February 4, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

um... No.

um....Yes, unless you are stating that the homosexual act before he was 16, over forty years ago is all that is needed to dismiss him no matter how long it has been since he has been married and faithful to his wife, taught others to be chaste, etc.

A letter was sent to the national BSA organization describing the dilemma and asking for permission to allow me to at least train adults. The response from the national legal committee was swift. I was not a good role model for youth.

So, a man who faithfully served young men for over ten years, had no complaints of impropriety, and spoke in favor of moral behavior as defined by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was not a good role model for young men. More than anything else, it was the sting of that assessment which hurt me the most, especially by two organizations that I held in high esteem.

This is what I don't understand, you would think they would want these kinds of examples as public as possible.

http://www.springsofwater.com/2010/02/22/big-can-of-worms/

Edited February 4, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

I'm not familiar with the older research (age bias, I guess), so I'm not in a position to refute it. However, the recent work I am aware of does indicates that gay men are no more likely to be sexually aroused by boys than straight men are to be aroused by girls. This article: http://springerlink....7p15/��presents well construcetd research that supports that conclusion.

This data suggests that attractions to various ages (Pre-pubescent, pubescent, or post-pubescent) are distinct categories of attraction as much as sex.

I also want to address the assertion that a "gay" pedophile (meaning a man who is attracted to prepubescent boys) is more likely to be attracted to prepubescent boys than a "straight" pedophile (defined as a man who is attracted to prepubescent girls). I can't argue with that. It is a self-supporting statement.

I believe the academic world treats the label of "gay" pedophile as a man who is homosexual with adult sexual partners and could be attracted to male or female children, not in reference to his sexual orientation in regards to the pedophilia...read an article somewhere that stated the precise labels but can't find it now and don't want to wade through all the trash that comes up using the search terms at this point.

[changed]

...Basically what the email is promoting is that males and females are incapable of being around each without turning the event into a debauchery festival, and if straight people can not comingle without turning the gathering into a fornication festival then most certainly those who identify as have homosexual thoughts are even more likely to commit folly with any member of the same sex.

If you think it's ok to put people who are sexually attracted to one another together in intimate settings, then I suppose we don't need separate bathrooms for boys and girls, and I suppose missionaries don't need to worry about being alone with the opposite sex, and I suppose everyone can go on camp outs with one another regardless of who they are attracted to, and we should just completely ignore the problems facing our kids...

Do a quick google search on "percentage of kids who are sexually active"

http://recapp.etr.or...tail&PageID=555

It is a major problem that does not need to be compounded by placing them in bad situations. Have you been around boys? Do you know what they talk about? Where their mind is from age 10 on? Do you want to pretend that their bodies are not undergoing any changes, and that they can be around anything and anyone and not have it effect their thoughts? Yo are very naive to think you can throw people who are sexually attracted to one another together, and not end up with problems.

Scenario one - all the boys are straight, no one is attracted to each other - the camp out/activities are about learning how to use a knife, how to read a compass, they are about building friendships - one of the very few safe places where they can go and not be reminded of their hormonal bodies

Scenario two - one of the people on the cam pout is not straight, the immature boys are paranoid the whole trip that "he is looking at me funny", joking about who he likes, thinking about what it means to be gay the entire time... straight boys defending their straightness by distancing themselves from those who are not straight etc. etc. do you really not know what boys are like? It would be bad for all parties involved.

Edited February 4, 2013 by changed

[Saints Alive]

They have. Multiple times, even when Bishops and Stake Presidents have supported calling a fatihful man with SSA.

I will readily admit to being unfamilliar with the protocol of this particualr forum. Please help me understand, as I am not aware of a social context in which "um... No." is a cogent response to request for CFR.

um....Yes, unless you are stating that the homosexual act before he was 16, over forty years ago is all that is needed to dismiss him no matter how long it has been since he has been married and faithful to his wife, taught others to be chaste, etc.

This is what I don't understand, you would think they would want these kinds of examples as public as possible.

http://www.springsofwater.com/2010/02/22/big-can-of-worms/

One example from a very shady source does not constitute a reference that many time both bishops and SPs have asked (or wanted) gay men to serve in scouts against the will of the BSA.

[gkearney]

In many places in the world including conservative islamic nations scouting is coed. I am a scout leader here in Australia with a coed group. With the proper guideline and policies in place coed scouting works fine. Long experience has shown that your fears are not justified.

[changed]

In many places in the world including conservative islamic nations scouting is coed. I am a scout leader here in Australia with a coed group. With the proper guideline and policies in place coed scouting works fine. Long experience has shown that your fears are not justified.

From my personal experience growing up (I did not grow up in the church) I went on a few coed camp outs with groups like Outward bound, and there was sexual activity at each and every camp out we went on. I don't think the group leaders knew about it, but it happened.

[kllindley]

Scenario one - all the boys are straight, no one is attracted to each other - the camp out/activities are about learning how to use a knife, how to read a compass, they are about building friendships - one of the very few safe places where they can go and not be reminded of their hormonal bodies

Scenario two - one of the people on the cam pout is not straight, the immature boys are paranoid the whole trip that "he is looking at me funny", joking about who he likes, thinking about what it means to be gay the entire time... straight boys defending their straightness by distancing themselves from those who are not straight etc. etc. do you really not know what boys are like? It would be bad for all parties involved.

Scenario One: At my Scout activities, the straight boys used it as the perfect opportunity to talk about female anatomy and personal sexual practices.

Scenario Two: As per official LDS policy, a young man with homosexual attractions who his morally clean is encouraged to serve a mission as early as age 18. He is in constant contact with another young man, who may or may not be very attractive, who may or may not know of his companion's attractions. In fact, two missionaries with SSA could reasonably be assigned as companions.

Again this is part of a double standard that even the Chruch no longer supports.

[rockpond]

Scenario two - one of the people on the cam pout is not straight, the immature boys are paranoid the whole trip that "he is looking at me funny", joking about who he likes, thinking about what it means to be gay the entire time... straight boys defending their straightness by distancing themselves from those who are not straight etc. etc. do you really not know what boys are like? It would be bad for all parties involved.

I have been camping, as an LDS leader, with a group of boys in which one of them was gay. I think you are underestimating these young men. none of what you describe happened.

And yes, this is anecdotal evidence. But your comment is conjecture.

[changed]

I exaggerate to make a point, but let's not deny that ~50% of kids are having sex. Let's not deny the changed group atmosphere that happens in a mixed crowd.

In your opinion, should all groups be required to make allowances so that everyone can attend? If they aren't 100% inclusive, they are bigoted and hate filled? Should Westernairs be required to accommodate those with animal allergies? Should the big and tall clothing stores be required to also carry cloths for short and small people? Should music schools be forced to admit deaf students? Is the best solution to dissolve and destroy all special interest groups, or is the best solution to suggest appropriate groups for everyone to join? in parable, musicians don't hate deaf people, and a deaf person probably would not feel 100% comfortable or included in a musicians group - the polite solution? they should find another hobby. Yes, it would be nice if everyone could do everything, but that is not realistic. We're not all the same, what is appropriate for one person is not appropriate for another.

Assigning a gay person as a missionary companion is akin to assigning a female to a male missionary companion. Assigning a gay scout leader is akin to sending the boys out with a female leader. I don't think it's appropriate, and I don't think it's realistic to pretend those types of combos don't change the nature and purpose of a group.

Edited February 4, 2013 by changed