Bsa Considering Ending Ban On Homosexuals

[Buckeye]

It would amount to a substantial compromise on a slippery slope. A good reason for the Church to cut its losses now and proceed in a different direction before things get worse.

That may well be. My hunch (not worth much) is that the church will maintain its ties to BSA now, but will also make much stronger contingency plans should a split happen in the future.

In a real sense the issue is out of the church's hands. The more I read the news articles, the more it seems that this decision was driven by donations stopping from corporate america. I think the church could function with the new policy if that were it. But I'm not sure the new policy will be enough for corporate america, as there will still be discrimination (just at a local level). Within a few years I believe other interests will require BSA to disallow any discrimination by local units. If that happends, the only way the church's ties could emain is if the church has a change of policy as to homosexuals. I'm not holding my breath.

So if you've got a boy in an LDS troop right now, you may want to push for Eagle sooner than later.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Buckeye

[Saints Alive]

Saints Alive, who is contemplating giving back is Eagle award as a show of protest,

For the record, I mentioned that other we suggesting that they would and I would consider it. I am very much on the fence and could go either way based on the church's response and the confirmation of the spirit. However, if I felt strongly enough that I returned my Eagle award I am not sure that I would feel ethically comfortable enough to participate in any form of scouting as an adult leader or otherwise. I do concede that others might not have the same reservations.

[Nathair/|\]

So the only reason to get married is to have sex and reproduce?

What have I told you guys multiple times is the definition of marriage under Brehon law?

[Saints Alive]

That may well be. My hunch (not worth much) is that the church will maintain its ties to BSA now, but will also make much stronger contingency plans should a split happen in the future.

In a real sense the issue is out of the church's hands. The more I read the news articles, the more it seems that this decision was driven by donations stopping from corporate america. I think the church could function with the new policy if that were it. But I'm not sure the new policy will be enough for corporate america, as there will still be discrimination (just at a local level). Within a few years I believe other interests will require BSA to disallow any discrimination by local units. If that happends, the only way the church's ties could emain is if the church has a change of policy as to homosexuals. I'm not holding my breath.

So if you've got a boy in an LDS troop right now, you may want to push for Eagle sooner than later.

Im not so sure. The church has softened considerably in regard to SSA so I could conceive that even a mandatory change could be a non issue for the Church.

[Buckeye]

Im not so sure. The church has softened considerably in regard to SSA so I could conceive that even a mandatory change could be a non issue for the Church.

The church has softened, but it still clearly teaches that homosexual actions are sinful. So if BSA adopted the same non-discrimination policy as Girl Scouts - including a prohibition to local units from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation - the church would either have to cut ties or change its teachings as to homosexual conduct.

[rockpond]

Thanks. I didn't mean to put you in the uncomfortable positions of passing judgment. I was only trying to illustrate that someone like Saints Alive, who is contemplating giving back is Eagle award as a show of protest, conceivably could still serve if called as a Scout leader.

So your comments have made me think about how we've handled calls into scouting positions. I've sat through numerous discussions about who to call into scouting positions and I've extended numerous calls into scouting positions. I don't recall ever asking about the rank a person achieved. And generally speaking, there was never a discussion about the person's attitude toward scouts unless it was to say that "Brother X just doesn't seem to enjoy scout-type activities".

That said, if I knew that a brother in our ward had returned his Eagle over this issue, while I can respect that decision I would be hesitant to call him into a scouting position without asking the question: "Can you effectively support our young men who want to advance in the BSA program without prejudice?"

[Saints Alive]

That said, if I knew that a brother in our ward had returned his Eagle over this issue, while I can respect that decision I would be hesitant to call him into a scouting position without asking the question: "Can you effectively support our young men who want to advance in the BSA program without prejudice?"

and if they said no? Would you call them to repentance or accept their objections to the BSA and call someone else?

[Scott Lloyd]

So your comments have made me think about how we've handled calls into scouting positions. I've sat through numerous discussions about who to call into scouting positions and I've extended numerous calls into scouting positions. I don't recall ever asking about the rank a person achieved. And generally speaking, there was never a discussion about the person's attitude toward scouts unless it was to say that "Brother X just doesn't seem to enjoy scout-type activities".

That said, if I knew that a brother in our ward had returned his Eagle over this issue, while I can respect that decision I would be hesitant to call him into a scouting position without asking the question: "Can you effectively support our young men who want to advance in the BSA program without prejudice?"

I would expect nothing less.

[Buckeye]

and if they said no? Would you call them to repentance or accept their objections to the BSA and call someone else?

Under the facts you've described, I can't see any basis to call someone to repentence. All you're saying is that you disagree with BSA and can't bring yourself to support the program, even though the church might. That's a reason not to call you into scouts, but not to call you to repentence. For me, it'd be no different than a man who says he would struggle being the YW basketball coach because he doesn't believe girls should play sports.

As a general premise, I don't think priesthood leaders call people to repentence for personal disagreements - even with the church - unless they start to advocate or stir up contention. So I may call someone to repentence if they actively try to undermine the ward's scouting program or speak evil of the church's continual involvement in scouting.

[cinepro]

The church has softened, but it still clearly teaches that homosexual actions are sinful. So if BSA adopted the same non-discrimination policy as Girl Scouts - including a prohibition to local units from discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation - the church would either have to cut ties or change its teachings as to homosexual conduct.

The comparison to Girl Scouts is a red herring. Girl Scouts do not use the "charter" system of Troops; there is much more self-determination for BSA troops when it comes to organization and leadership. LDS troops could still refuse to call homosexual leaders (just as they refuse to call female leaders), and the BSA couldn't (and, according to their statements as far as I can tell, wouldn't) do anything about it.

[volgadon]

Popular etymology notwithstanding, the sin of Sodom was not primarly homosexuality, but hatred, betrayal, and rape. http://books.google.com/books?id=0EOS8Xaak9QC&pg=PA124&dq=women+bible+tikvah+proposed+rape+traveler+jail&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hBoIUfHYA8TVyAGQuoG4CQ&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=women%20bible%20tikvah%20proposed%20rape%20traveler%20jail&f=false

Be one's stance on homosexuality as it may, I feel that before prooftexting we ough to look for the intended meaning of the scriptural passage. Reading this one as a mere indictment of homosexuality misses what the text is really trying to say, and its broader application.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Being forced into a no win situation. I dont see why BSA doesnt just keep the same standard in place they have always had. Must every organization be swayed to the lack of principle that Sodom and Gomorrah had?

There is merit on both sides of this issue, it is heart wrenching. But as a Father and grandfather I will be on the side of caution. Gay people don't choose how they feel, they are in the same boat with us...they must control how they act; we all do!

[volgadon]

There is merit on both sides of this issue, it is heart wrenching. But as a Father and grandfather I will be on the side of caution. Gay people don't choose how they feel, they are in the same boat with us...they must control how they act; we all do!

Quoted for truth.

[ERayR]

and if they said no? Would you call them to repentance or accept their objections to the BSA and call someone else?

Once upon a time my Bishop called me into his office and asked if I would be the scout master. My reply went like this: " Bishop I like scouting activities but I have a big problem with the professional scout organization. I think it is full of people on ego trips worried more about their own recognition. I would find it difficult to participate on that level. If you would be OK with me working with the boys and forgetting the rest I would be happy to and one other problem I have no vehicle suitable for the calling". His reply was: You work with the boys and I will find somebody else to coordinate with the BSA and I have a pickup and another brother has a 10 passenger van and either is available to you any time you want.

The Bishops pickup and the other brothers van got a lot of use over the next year and a half. Also of the 5 or 6 boys I started with 4 of them went on to achieve Eagle rank. Not because it was the end all but because we made it enjoyable enough that they wanted to and they had some competent scoutmasters after I was released.

[rockpond]

and if they said no? Would you call them to repentance or accept their objections to the BSA and call someone else?

I would definitely not call them to repentance. Not my place nor would do I see a need. I would accept their objections. As for the call, that would depend on a number of individualized factors the most important being the spiritual confirmation we had received.

[california boy]

I see this a bit differently from many on this board. I guess that will not come as a surprise to anyone. The church has a very anti-gay image amongst a large part of both the country and somewhat internationally. Many people view the church as bigoted when it comes to this issue.

(PLEASE NOTE: I personally do not find the church bigoted or particularly anti gay. Read this statement as many times as you need to in order to not be confused that how I view the church and how others view the church are two different things)

The church has come a long way from when it actively got involved in Prop 8. It has made and continues to make great strides in reaching out to the gay community both within the church and without. I applaud them for this Christ-like effort in reaching out to the individuals while not embracing the sin of homosexuality.

Currently the church is in a awkward position of having a gay scout which under current BSA rules should be excluded from all scouting activities. This seems to be the exact opposite of what the church would like to do with gay members who are celibate.

I view this current situation as being a golden opportunity for the church to make a real statement that reflects a true picture of how the church treats homosexuals. If the church called a press conference today and stated that they hoped the BSA would change their current stance on gay membership and allow all gay boys and leaders who remain celibate to join Boy Scouts of America. What a statement that would make. Rather than constantly being on the defensive on this issue, the church would be out ahead of the issue and would further the churches effort to be welcoming and inclusive to all gay members who desire to be celibate. What do you think? Bad idea? Good Idea?

[Saints Alive]

I don't think the church would try to dictate another organizations policy, but they may very well support your view.

[Saints Alive]

I would definitely not call them to repentance. Not my place nor would do I see a need. I would accept their objections. As for the call, that would depend on a number of individualized factors the most important being the spiritual confirmation we had received.

Not that it is directly related but, I was in a ward where a couple had there temple recommend taken away for opposing the calling of a black bishop. He had not yet been called but it had slipped out that he was going to be called. The former bishop is the one the revoked the recommend. However, the man ended up not being called. So I guess what I am say is that even though you might not personally call someone to repentance for there personal views, others might.

[rongo]

Currently the church is in a awkward position of having a gay scout which under current BSA rules should be excluded from all scouting activities. This seems to be the exact opposite of what the church would like to do with gay members who are celibate.

Gay, as in "SSA," or gay, as in "sexually active?"

The Church currently has more than one Scout with SSA, as I'm sure you know. I am still very confused as to whether the BSA policy ban on "gay" leaders and Scouts is intended to include SSA only as well as "sexually active." If so, can this be demonstrated (friendly CFR)?

I think the reason this is news is because it is a loosening at the local level if people want to allow sexually active gay men and boys. I don't think BSA has ever "banned" a boy or leader for simply having SSA but not acting on it. Have they?

[Scott Lloyd]

Gay, as in "SSA," or gay, as in "sexually active?"

The Church currently has more than one Scout with SSA, as I'm sure you know. I am still very confused as to whether the BSA policy ban on "gay" leaders and Scouts is intended to include SSA only as well as "sexually active." If so, can this be demonstrated (friendly CFR)?

I think the reason this is news is because it is a loosening at the local level if people want to allow sexually active gay men and boys. I don't think BSA has ever "banned" a boy or leader for simply having SSA but not acting on it. Have they?

That's a very good question and one that needs to be clarified before the public debate progresses much farther.

[california boy]

Gay, as in "SSA," or gay, as in "sexually active?"

The Church currently has more than one Scout with SSA, as I'm sure you know. I am still very confused as to whether the BSA policy ban on "gay" leaders and Scouts is intended to include SSA only as well as "sexually active." If so, can this be demonstrated (friendly CFR)?

I think the reason this is news is because it is a loosening at the local level if people want to allow sexually active gay men and boys. I don't think BSA has ever "banned" a boy or leader for simply having SSA but not acting on it. Have they?

Gay as in gay, but celibate. I actually know of no gay person who identifies himself as having SSA. The church has been using this term less and less. I personally find that a good move on their part. They are using language that is more universally understood. No one is confused with the term gay but celibate which is the term I used.

[Scott Lloyd]

Gay as in gay, but celibate. I actually know of no gay person who identifies himself as having SSA. The church has been using this term less and less. I personally find that a good move on their part. They are using language that is more universally understood. No one is confused with the term gay but celibate which is the term I used.

I don't find SSA all that confusing. Nor have I noticed a marked or intentional move on the part of the Church to avoid its use.

[Lightbearer]

If the policy is changed, so much for this part of the Boy Scout oath: "...morally straight..." ?

Oh and if it is changed I would no longer support the BSA... I would suggest the Church start it's on youth/scout type program in it's place.

[rongo]

Gay as in gay, but celibate. I actually know of no gay person who identifies himself as having SSA.

I do. He was a priest in our ward (I was his bishop). Attracted to males, not at all attracted to females, and obedient to the laws and commandments of the Church. There are many youth and adults like that.

The church has been using this term less and less. I personally find that a good move on their part. They are using language that is more universally understood. No one is confused with the term gay but celibate which is the term I used.

Can you see why this is still confusing to many, and needs to be clarified? Nobody really uses "gay but celibate," either. When we are told that there can now be "gay" leaders and Scouts, what does that mean, exactly? We currently have "gay" leaders and Scouts under the SSA understanding, but never under the "sexually active" understanding. When can we confirm that this is, indeed, the change that has or will soon happen within BSA?

[Damien the Leper]

No but it was the first command God gave to man, be fruitful and multiply.

Was that before or after Eden? There is a HUGE difference between the TRUE first commandment and the secondary commandment given to mortality.