california boy Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 JEN TYRRELL AND OTHER GAY SCOUTS AND LEADERS DELIVERING 1.4 MILLION SIGNATURES TO BOY SCOUT HQhttp://www.glaad.org/blog/jen-tyrrell-and-other-gay-scouts-and-leaders-delivering-14-million-signatures-boy-scout-hq?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+glaadblog+%28GLAAD+Blog%29
rockpond Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 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?No and no. And I support the BSA's right to make whatever decision it wants. And I think that the church should maintain its relationship with the BSA regardless of which way the BSA board votes this week.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.Do you realize that we, as a church, already do assign gay missionaries to be companions with straight missionaries?And do you also realize that the BSA has authorized female leaders over boys for at least over 40 years?
rockpond Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 JEN TYRRELL AND OTHER GAY SCOUTS AND LEADERS DELIVERING 1.4 MILLION SIGNATURES TO BOY SCOUT HQhttp://www.glaad.org...og (GLAAD Blog)Well, Jen Tyrrell (a married lesbian) was obviously a danger to those boys in her son's Tiger Cub Den.
kllindley Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 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.Ah, if I understand you correctly, the "um.. No" was a statement that a single example did not support the use of "many" in the original argument. I am not in a position to share the experiences of others who have not chosen to be public with their experience. Our culture still holds a lot of shame around this topic.I'm also intrigued that you describe this individual's personal account is not only "shady" (CFR?) but "very shady." Do you have any reasons for this label? Do you have information that suggests his account is not true, or that his character is in question?I wish I could offer you evidence that meets your standards. However, the wording in the comment above suggests that no evidence would be sufficient for you. By using the ambiguous term gay in a conversation that has repeatedly called for more accurate descriptions, you imply that you don't believe there is a moral difference between attractions and behavior. I respect your right to disagree with the Church on this topic.
Calm Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 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.A shady source? You have got to be kidding me.
Calm Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 .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.So what are you suggesting the Church do with its gay members, cover them in bubble wrap and stick them in a corner? Assign them to go to YW and RS? Not allow them to home teach or do anything that might cause them to be alone with another man?
Ahab Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 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.Let's not say it's not a good thing for people who are attracted to each other to be together, either, though. I'd love to go on a mission and have many mission experiences with someone of the opposite sex, even if I was having a sexual relationship with her every night. She'd have to be my wife, of course, since I'm already taken, but if I wasn't and was looking it wouldn't bother me in the least to have someone I was attracted to right there with me and any other person we were with.
DavidB Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 Changed, you don't think it is appropriateand you base that on a false premise, that premise being that opposite genders can not comingle without it turning into debauchery or fornication.
DavidB Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 Well, Jen Tyrrell (a married lesbian) was obviously a danger to those boys in her son's Tiger Cub Den. I am male, I did not have a male teacher until the 6th grade, made it all through elementary, high school, college without incident from my female teachers.I am male was in cub scouts and my cub scout leaders were females, made it through cub scouts without incident.
Saints Alive Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 Ah, if I understand you correctly, the "um.. No" was a statement that a single example did not support the use of "many" in the original argument. I am not in a position to share the experiences of others who have not chosen to be public with their experience. Our culture still holds a lot of shame around this topic.Then how can you say many leaders hold this view? That would be your assumption and not a statement of fact. There is no way to know how many SPs, Bishops, etc. have tried or believe that Gay / SSA individuals should be able to hold scouting callings.I'm also intrigued that you describe this individual's personal account is not only "shady" (CFR?) but "very shady." Do you have any reasons for this label? Do you have information that suggests his account is not true, or that his character is in question? bottom line, the website you provided looks like something a 15 y/o came up with. I have no way of knowing if that is a true story or some activists attempt to show support where there is none.. By using the ambiguous term gay in a conversation that has repeatedly called for more accurate descriptions, you imply that you don't believe there is a moral difference between attractions and behavior. I respect your right to disagree with the Church on this topic.thats a bit of a stretch... So you claim to know my intentions by my use of a word that even you state is ambiguous? Did I ever say there was no moral difference between behavior and attraction? NO, AND IN THE FUTURE I WOULD APPRICIATE IT IF YOU DON'T TELL ME WHAT MY POSTS "IMPLY"When the shouting begins the thread ends.
Recommended Posts