rockpond Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 The BSA has voted to allow gay leaders while also permitting individual units to continue to prohibit them. The Church Newsroom has issued a statement saying that the governing councils will have to re-evaluate our involvement in the scouting program:http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-re-evaluating-scouting-program 1
Russell C McGregor Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 (edited) Neither of these developments is particularly surprising. Well, the second one might be, to those who are expecting the Church of Jesus Christ to cave in on same sex "marriage," but not to those who understand LDS life and teaching. Edited July 28, 2015 by Russell C McGregor 4
Tacenda Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 (edited) It looks as though the church will discontinue it's affiliation with BSA, imo. Especially when they mention re-evaluating the program since about half of the youth worlwide don't have it available to them. Edited July 28, 2015 by Tacenda 1
Lost in Ohio Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 That is as strongly worded a statement as I've seen the Church issue in some time. I definitely got the sense they were "peeved" with Scouting about the decision and the timing. I suspect we are on the way out of the BSA.
Popular Post Duncan Posted July 28, 2015 Popular Post Posted July 28, 2015 it's phrased funny, as in what doctrines of the Church won't allow for openly gay leaders? I have heard of the doctrine of the atonement, the doctrine of faith, but this? 5
CV75 Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 (edited) it's phrased funny, as in what doctrines of the Church won't allow for openly gay leaders? I have heard of the doctrine of the atonement, the doctrine of faith, but this?The doctrine of marriage and chastity are at odds with rendering tacit approval of sinful sexual behavior. This is the situation the Church faces now that the BSA admits youth leaders who make a point of publishing their lifestyle. Edited July 28, 2015 by CV75 2
Popular Post Duncan Posted July 28, 2015 Popular Post Posted July 28, 2015 The doctrine of marriage and chastity are at odds with rendering tacit approval of sinful sexual behavior. This is the situation the Church faces now that the BSA admits youth leaders who make a point of publishing their lifestyle. I guess to split hairs but openly gay could mean they acknowledge they are gay but don't have sex, just like me I am openly straight but I don't have sex 5
smac97 Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 A few thoughts: 1. I wonder if there is a concern that the Boy Scouts may end up being recruiting grounds for introducing young men to homosexuality. I have previously referenced this article by Dr. Judith Riesman. It addresses at some length what she describes as an "organized homosexual campaign to recruit children." The article is heavily annotated, and it includes various references to various youth groups/organizations being exploited in a campaign to recruit children into a homosexual lifestyle. Or, as one of the editors of Lavender Culture, an anthology about homosexual life in America, put it: "I believe . . . we have to behave in a certain way vis-à-vis young people. I believe that means we have to proselytize . . . . The answer is to proselytize. Aggressively so." Dwell on that for a moment. "To preselytize" means "to convert or attempt to convert as a proselyte; recruit." 2. Another example: Gerald Hannon, in his article, "Gay Youth and the Question of Consent" (published in Lavender Culture), talks at length about "sexual childhood" and the need for the United States to repeal age-of-consent laws. Some excerpts: "Why is sexual childhood necessary? By that I mean why is it necessary to maintain the myth that children are not sexual beings? It is maintained, after all, in the face of rather massive evidence to the contrary ... Simply being young does not endow you with a perspective on social change. That has to be learned. Consciousness-raising is crucial . . . And if the Gay Youth Group isn’t prepared quite yet to demand an abolition to age-of-consent laws, that’s all right. But it’s one of the things they’re preparing for..." Dwell on that for a moment. Why are gay rights activists so adamant about repealing age-of-consent laws (laws which govern the age at which a minor can legally consent to engaging in sexual activity - most particularly sexual activity with adults)? 3. Another example: San Francisco State University Sexuality Professor and homosexual advocate Gilbert Herdt spells specific objectives in his anthology Gay Culture in America. As summarized by Reisman (emphases added): After the advent of the AIDS epidemic, academic homosexual leaders worried that boys were avoiding gay men. Herdt explained that homosexual leaders determined they must access schools, scouts, and other child institutions in order to "institutionalize ‘socialization’ techniques" to bring homosexuality to mainstream youth in the mid-1980s and reverse a growing youthful resistance to homosexuality. School newspaper ads seeking "gay" youths and proclaiming a battle against gay suicide and associated "hate" crimes began to appear regularly. Herdt explained why homosexual recruitment efforts increased. "We had not foreseen that . . . gay youth would also have to contend with the new horrors of AIDS (and that) . . . teenage gays and lesbians would shun older gays as role models or even as friends . . . ." To meet this challenge, Herdt said, "(O)nly now has gay culture begun to institutionalize ‘socialization’ techniques for the transmission of its cultural knowledge to a younger generation . . ." as "local ‘gay’ movements provide their own infrastructural support for the coming out process in teens." Dwell on that. Gay rights advocates such as Herdt is on record as advocating the use of scouting programs by "gay culture" for "the transmission of its cultural knowledge to a younger generation." Here's another quote from Reisman about Herdt to close this out: "Employing the language of religion and ritual, Professor Herdt says adult–led gay youth groups direct the 'adolescent entry first into a self-affirming semi-secret group, then by collective socialization into a ‘gay’ cultural system . . . .' Men "seclude() and protect() the youths, furthering their initiation . . . which socializes them further into the cultural system of the gay community.'" Thanks, -Smac 3
Storm Rider Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 I guess to split hairs but openly gay could mean they acknowledge they are gay but don't have sex, just like me I am openly straight but I don't have sex I guess to split hairs, how many openly gay men do you know that are celibate? I have heard of a few that claimed they were gay, or as they say they have SSA, but are married. However, I have never met a man - i.e. not a young man, who was openly gay and not sexually active.
Storm Rider Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Smac, you must be mistaken. When we discuss the gay culture it is only about two individuals that happen to be of the same sex that are desperately in love and have been prevented for thousands of years of living free to express their love. Further, it is about the horrible "straight" people that have ruthlessly persecuted these individuals for their sexual preference and denied them their human, civil rights. It is only about love; there is no premeditation, no recruitment, no seeking to enroll innocent young people into considering a new form of sexuality. After all, you either are homosexual or you are not. 2
Duncan Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 I guess to split hairs, how many openly gay men do you know that are celibate? I have heard of a few that claimed they were gay, or as they say they have SSA, but are married. However, I have never met a man - i.e. not a young man, who was openly gay and not sexually active. none that I know of but how many gay men want to have sex with children? that's a pedophile 1
Storm Rider Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 none that I know of but how many gay men want to have sex with children? that's a pedophile Please clarify the difference between a gay man that likes young people - say ages 15 to 18 - and a pedophile that likes young people of the same sex - say between the ages of 15 to 18? I never quite get the reason for the distinction, but I am willing to learn. 1
Duncan Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Please clarify the difference between a gay man that likes young people - say ages 15 to 18 - and a pedophile that likes young people of the same sex - say between the ages of 15 to 18? I never quite get the reason for the distinction, but I am willing to learn. I am no expert but I think a pedophile is someone who likes children, sexually and I suppose it can go on later into teenhood. Maybe a gay person who likes teens is into younger people? just as in when you're young you like older women but when you're older you like younger women (if you're a guy of course)
Storm Rider Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 I am no expert but I think a pedophile is someone who likes children, sexually and I suppose it can go on later into teenhood. Maybe a gay person who likes teens is into younger people? just as in when you're young you like older women but when you're older you like younger women (if you're a guy of course) There are other labels that could be used; I am just strongly resistant to being PC. If there is sex between two individuals of the same sex, regardless of age, it is homosexual sex. Using other labels clouds the issue and makes for disingenuous discussion about this specific topic. 1
omni Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Please clarify the difference between a gay man that likes young people - say ages 15 to 18 - and a pedophile that likes young people of the same sex - say between the ages of 15 to 18? I never quite get the reason for the distinction, but I am willing to learn.I'm not sure you want to go there considering the ages of some of the early church prophet's wives. Pedophilia is generally considered an attraction to pre-pubescent children which almost always excludes children from the ages of 15-18. 2
Mars Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Smac97 I'm not trying to be combative, so I'm sorry if I came across that way. It's just hard to believe some of the claims outlined by Judith Reisman. Feels too folk devil-y. Just kinda feels like scare tactics. 1
Danzo Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 I guess to split hairs but openly gay could mean they acknowledge they are gay but don't have sex, just like me I am openly straight but I don't have sexIn the church, gay means practicing homosexuality, not ones particular temptations. I don't think the church has a problem with people's temptations 1
Danzo Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 (edited) none that I know of but how many gay men want to have sex with children? that's a pedophilehere in Oregon, it seems to be quite common, the ex mayor of Portland seemed to have an issue with it. More than recently there is a gay activist in Eugene that also seems to have a bit of trouble with it as well Edited July 28, 2015 by Danzo
SmileyMcGee Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Did anyone else get the feeling from the church's statement that church leadership is more upset about how/when the decision was made than the decision itself? I guess I don't understand why the church would be upset with the decision when it is free to exclude homosexuals individuals from troop leadership...maybe their upset with the direction BSA is going...or since this comes shortly after the Supreme Court decision. Regardless, it was an interesting press release 1
SmileyMcGee Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 Also, it may be nice to not turn this into a gay = pedophile discussion. 2
rockpond Posted July 28, 2015 Author Posted July 28, 2015 It looks as though the church will discontinue it's affiliation with BSA, imo. Especially when they mention re-evaluating the program since about half of the youth worlwide don't have it available to them.I don't think that the Church will leave the BSA over this. I think the strongly worded press release is the church asserting its position (a strong one) within the organization. If the church was truly going to leave over this - I think it would have been stopped.
filovirus Posted July 28, 2015 Posted July 28, 2015 In a church that teaches the law of chastity as sexual relations only between a man and a woman, it doesn't make sense to have an actively practicing gay person being their overseer and role model, even if they would be equally or more qualified to teach a scout troop. 2
rockpond Posted July 28, 2015 Author Posted July 28, 2015 (edited) it's phrased funny, as in what doctrines of the Church won't allow for openly gay leaders? I have heard of the doctrine of the atonement, the doctrine of faith, but this?Yeah, I wonder what definition of "openly" they are using. There is nothing doctrinally wrong with publicly admitting one's homosexual orientation. You can hold a temple recommend while being open about being homosexual. I bet that particular statement gets corrected soon. Edited July 28, 2015 by rockpond 2
rockpond Posted July 28, 2015 Author Posted July 28, 2015 In a church that teaches the law of chastity as sexual relations only between a man and a woman, it doesn't make sense to have an actively practicing gay person being their overseer and role model, even if they would be equally or more qualified to teach a scout troop.And LDS chartered troops are still free to make that decision.
Recommended Posts