Boy Scouts Of America Compromise?

[rongo]

http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/04/19/us-usa-boyscouts-ban-idINBRE93I0OY20130419

I'm okay with this, but I think when it will really hit the fan will be pressure now over actively gay leaders. Since BSA has reaffirmed (or will, when it's put to a vote in May) that any sexuality, hetero- or homo-, for Scouts is against policy, this isn't actually different in practice from how it was before. Many troops had boys with SSA but who weren't active homosexuals, but it was always unclear whether the policy precluded sexually-active gay boys only or also included SSA boys.

This appears to be a clarification, in the hopes of averting the nuclear option from both sides with either "stand firm" or "open up the Berlin Wall" -style decisions.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out!

[Vance]

Will they be removing "morally straight" from the Scout Law?

[rongo]

Why would they? Active sexuality of any kind will still be against Scouting principles. Having SSA, but not acting on it, doesn't make one not "morally straight."

[CASteinman]

I have a hard time seeing how this is substantially different than in the past -- for most of the organization.

[RobertAC]

It seems clear to me what is happening. The BSA will remove the most controversial position that they have had -- excluding boys who come out as gay. After the ban is lifted, in one to two years time there will be a reevaluation of the ban on adults. Low and behold, there will be another revelation that the policy banning gay adults is counterproductive, and the scouts will close the issue of correct sexual orientation as a prerequisite for BSA membership for good.

[Wanderer7]

I think this is probably a good change. I do, however, worry about the slippery slope. The church will not change, but I think the day will come when BSA does. That will be hard for a lot of us. Society has a lot of pressure, and it's unfortunate when those influences change the good things in the world for the worse.

[USU78]

I smell camel.

[EllenMaksoud]

http://in.reuters.co...E93I0OY20130419

I'm okay with this, but I think when it will really hit the fan will be pressure now over actively gay leaders. Since BSA has reaffirmed (or will, when it's put to a vote in May) that any sexuality, hetero- or homo-, for Scouts is against policy, this isn't actually different in practice from how it was before. Many troops had boys with SSA but who weren't active homosexuals, but it was always unclear whether the policy precluded sexually-active gay boys only or also included SSA boys.

This appears to be a clarification, in the hopes of averting the nuclear option from both sides with either "stand firm" or "open up the Berlin Wall" -style decisions.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out!

Gosh, this makes me feel crazy!!! So your 12 year old son is caught snogging with his girlfriend. Is that permissible? So, then he gets caught looking at Playboy magazine at camp. Is that permissible? All you have to say is that any sexual or lewd activity at Scout functions is unacceptable full stop! That will take in the Hetros and the Homosexuals in one fell swoop.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I am still thinking about this potential change. Not sure how I feel about it yet. But....

So (I am not big on hyptheticals but this might be fruitful) there is a gay kid that joins the scouts and goes on a camp out he sleeps in teh same tend as others in his troop. Tell me, how is that different then letting a boy go on a girl scout camp and sleeping in the same tent as the girls? Is that something we sould be worried about? If not why not? If not should boys be allowed to go on girl scout camps and sleep in the same tent as the girls?

Edited April 19, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Saints Alive]

I am still thinking about this potential change. Not sure how I feel about it yet. But....

So (I am not big on hyptheticals but this might be fruitful) there is a gay kid that joins the scouts and goes on a camp out he sleeps in teh same tend as others in his troop. Tell me, how is that different then letting a boy go on a girl scout camp and sleeping in the same tent as the girls? Is that something we sould be worried about? If not why not? If not should boys be allowed to go on girl scout camps and sleep in the same tent as the girls?

It seems like that might be an unfair temptation for the YM with SSA to share a tent with another boy. Think about the age differences in scouting too 11-17, a seventeen year old can have a lot of influence on an 11 year old. I think the BSA is asking for trouble with this.

I plan to steer clear of the whole mess, I will not accept any YM calling that requires BSA participation. I'm cutting my ties with them.

Edited April 19, 2013 by Saints Alive

[Gillebre]

Saints Alive, that's like tempting the Lord to extend you just such a calling. lol.

[Wanderer7]

I am still thinking about this potential change. Not sure how I feel about it yet. But....

So (I am not big on hyptheticals but this might be fruitful) there is a gay kid that joins the scouts and goes on a camp out he sleeps in teh same tend as others in his troop. Tell me, how is that different then letting a boy go on a girl scout camp and sleeping in the same tent as the girls? Is that something we sould be worried about? If not why not? If not should boys be allowed to go on girl scout camps and sleep in the same tent as the girls?

I don't disagree wit you, but what would be the difference between the old policy with boys who never tell anyone they are attracted to men but still go on camp outs?

[Saints Alive]

Saints Alive, that's like tempting the Lord to extend you just such a calling. lol.

I guess we will see

[Saints Alive]

I don't disagree wit you, but what would be the difference between the old policy with boys who never tell anyone they are attracted to men but still go on camp outs?

The difference is that you don't know you are putting boys at risk if the boy is keeping it secret. If they are out you have to accept that risk knowingly

[Daniel2]

In this case, I believe those that sense a slippery slope on the horizon are correct: now that the Boy Scouts accept openly gay scouts, it will only be a short time before those gay scouts (and their fellow straight counterparts) grow up and wonder why gay Eagle Scouts cannot serve the organization in which they've grown up.

Within a few years, the vast majority of Americans will not see gay scouts or leaders as a problem, just as other nations currently accept gay leaders and scouts in their Scouting organizations.

In this sense, social acceptance based on sexual orientation will mirror the path of social acceptance based on race, as racial integration became the social norm. "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice."

Daniel2

Edited April 20, 2013 by Daniel2

[Saints Alive]

I wonder how the church will respond to this? Will it be enough to cause them to cut ties?

[Tacenda]

In this case, I believe those that sense a slippery slope on the horizon are correct: now that the Boy Scouts accept openly gay scouts, it will only be a short time before those gay scouts grow up and wonder why they cannot serve the organization in which they've grown up.

Within a few years, the vast majority of Americans will not see gay scouts or leaders as a problem, just as other nations currently accept gay leaders and scouts in their Scouting organizations.

In this sense, so civil rights based on sexual orietation will mirror the path of race-based civil rights, as racial integration became the social norm.

Daniel2

I couldn't agree more Daniel2. I just came home from the movie "42" about Jackie Robinson, it showed how he was constantly told he didn't belong, along with others and weren't allowed in certain places because and only because, they were black. Slowly people came to change their thinking, just like what is happening right now with gays. Hopefully more and more people will love their neighbor as God commanded. Slippery slope... Slip on down, slip on down the slope, to the tune "ease on down, ease on down the road" . Edited April 20, 2013 by Tacenda

[Daniel2]

I wonder how the church will respond to this? Will it be enough to cause them to cut ties?

I wonder the same, SA.

I also wonder if both this and the mainstreaming of same-sex marriage are sowing the seeds of Official Declaration 3 ("A revelation given to the body of the church, by the gift and power of God, by and through the hand of his prophet, seer, and revelator, even President David A. Bednar, concerning the worthiness of the children of Our Father in Heaven on whom are bestowed attractions towards members of their own gender...")

Daniel2

Edited April 20, 2013 by Daniel2

[Saints Alive]

Time will tell

[CASteinman]

I wonder how the church will respond to this? Will it be enough to cause them to cut ties?

I bet they support this and would have pushed for it.

[Saints Alive]

I bet they support this and would have pushed for it.

The wording is actually interesting, it seems like it would keep troops from baring youth from joining for being gay but would allow them to bar them if they are currently acting on it.

[Stone holm]

I liked the prior compromise better. They should have let each Chartering Organization set the policy for their

Units. That way LDS units could have continued to discriminate, and other Chartering Organizations could have had Lesbian Den Mothers if they wanted them. This is just going to keep the controversy going, to the detriment of both the Church and the BSA. Now we have both the liberals and the conservatives clamouring to cut ties for different reasons. It's a shame that an iconic American Organization is being torn apart by religious/political football.

[CASteinman]

The wording is actually interesting, it seems like it would keep troops from baring youth from joining for being gay but would allow them to bar them if they are currently acting on it.

So you see what I mean.

[Saints Alive]

So you see what I mean.

Yeah, I wouldn't be at all surprise if the church was involved in the compromise. I don't know that for sure though. I wonder if all the news focus on Boston had to do with the BSAs decision to make this change now.

Anyone know how the Catholics and Baptists are responding to this?

[Wanderer7]

This is how the church will respond:

"Tolerance is a virtue, but like all virtues, when exaggerated, it transforms itself into a vice. We need to be careful of the “tolerance trap” so that we are not swallowed up in it. The permissiveness afforded by the weakening of the laws of the land to tolerate legalized acts of immorality does not reduce the serious spiritual consequence that is the result of the violation of God’s law of chastity."

"The word tolerance is also invoked as though it overrules everything else. Tolerance may be a virtue, but it is not the commanding one. There is a difference between what one is and what one does. What one is may deserve unlimited tolerance; what one does, only a measured amount. A virtue when pressed to the extreme may turn into a vice. Unreasonable devotion to an ideal, without considering the practical application of it, ruins the ideal itself."

Boyd K. Packer

In other words, tolerance for other people is not more important than the sanctity of life in God's eyes. When we mess with sexuality, we mess with Christ's sacrifice. I think we should be accepting of people as they are, and forgiving when they make a mistake, but homosexual attraction is no different than any other natural man tendency. Science and society would try to convince us otherwise. However, when we say it is "ok" to be gay, we are saying it's ok to have lustful thoughts, want to steal, or contemplate violent acts. Sure, those desires don't constitute the sin, and we all struggle with such things. However, the purpose of life is to overcome those tendencies, not accept them as part of who we are. I don't know that this means openly gay boys should be excluded from scouting, but we need to be careful what message we are sending.

Edited April 20, 2013 by Wanderer7