Despite protests, Boy Scouts reaffirm ban on gays

The BSA (to my knowledge) has not released their specific reasons for denying homosexuals, be that religious, inappropriate sexual actions, or moral viewpoint; however, I remember the amount of sexual contact that happened during “band camp” and “choir tour” between the teenage boys and girls. I am surprised that a school hasn’t been sued because someone’s daughter got pregnant during a school trip and the school didn’t do enough to protect the students. I wonder if the BSA is more worried about lawsuits and personal liability than a specific moral stance.

Seems doubtful that it related to anything other than the group's bigotry. In all honesty, there seems to be a minimal chance of liability issues with homosexual students as long as it isn't directed from leaders. What happens between consenting minors is hard to prosecute. And what type of "protection" are we talking about that isn't mostly morally based (versus legally based)? Teenagers have sex and will always figure out a way to do so. From what historical studies show, somewhere around a third of "hetersexuals" explore sexual boundaries in their teens in hetereo-normative environments already.

I decided years ago that if/when I have a kid I will not let them join the BSA or GSA. Neither of the organizations has managed to account for the complexities of a child's life or even seems to fully care. The BSA is an antiquated concept of masculinity and citizenship. Its a rigid program that exploits ideas from a different era. Its rear-looking instead of forward thinking. Makes sense to me that they stick to such bigoted ideas in policy.

As to the uncertainty of their basis for the decision:

http://web.archive.org/web/201002061...-cases-225.asp

[QUOTE]"Boy Scouts of America believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the obligations in the Scout Oath and Scout Law to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed. The conduct of youth members must be in compliance with the Scout Oath and Law, and membership in Boy Scouts of America is contingent upon the willingness to accept Scouting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by restrac2000

Seems doubtful that it related to anything other than the group's bigotry. In all honesty, there seems to be a minimal chance of liability issues with homosexual students as long as it isn't directed from leaders. What happens between consenting minors is hard to prosecute. And what type of "protection" are we talking about that isn't mostly morally based (versus legally based)? Teenagers have sex and will always figure out a way to do so. From what historical studies show, somewhere around a third of "hetersexuals" explore sexual boundaries in their teens in hetereo-normative environments already.

I decided years ago that if/when I have a kid I will not let them join the BSA or GSA. Neither of the organizations has managed to account for the complexities of a child's life or even seems to fully care. The BSA is an antiquated concept of masculinity and citizenship. Its a rigid program that exploits ideas from a different era. Its rear-looking instead of forward thinking. Makes sense to me that they stick to such bigoted ideas in policy.

As to the uncertainty of their basis for the decision:

http://web.archive.org/web/201002061...-cases-225.asp



They may want to hide that recent concept but it is part of their legal and social dogma.

Phillip

---

Thanks for posting the link, very informative. I enjoyed my time with the BSA and had a good experience. I am sure I could have had a similar experience by spending the same amount of time outdoors with family, sports, or school activities. I think it is good for individuals, young and old, to be involved in something that are passionate about.

For me it's simple, the scouts are a very moral organization their Scout Oath and Scout Law are to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed (as mentioned above). If you believe homosexuality to be immoral, which I would think most religious people do, then why would you then want your son or daughter to participate in an organization that is catering to a perceived immoral behavior?

Why let 4 or 5% of society dictate everything? I think part of the issue is the in your face gayness. I'll never understand why gay men can't just walk around and act normally? Why must they flaunt their sexual preference? My friend who I've known for 15 years is openly gay and MUST tell everyone how wonderful it is. It may be stereotyping, but I'd say he's the norm. Totally over the top, in your face gay. Seems everywhere you go there has to be some aspect of gay in everything, TV, movies, news, etc. You'd think everyone was gay from the media but it's only 4-5% or so I've read.

I really don't have an issue with it, hell whatever floats your boat. I could care less who's boning who. But I don't like being constantly told how awesome it is or having it thrown in my face at every turn which seems to be what's happening here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byron

Well, it looks like most around here want to tap dance around the issue, or ignore it altogether...consider Jerry Sandusky. There is the problem, boys and girls...if they allow gays to openly operate there you would have perverts coming in like ringing a dinner bell. That's it, period.

---

Wow. I thought this kind of ignorance was long gone. Apparently not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nelsonccc

For me it's simple, the scouts are a very moral organization their Scout Oath and Scout Law are to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed (as mentioned above). If you believe homosexuality to be immoral, which I would think most religious people do, then why would you then want your son or daughter to participate in an organization that is catering to a perceived immoral behavior?

Why let 4 or 5% of society dictate everything? I think part of the issue is the in your face gayness. I'll never understand why gay men can't just walk around and act normally? Why must they flaunt their sexual preference? My friend who I've known for 15 years is openly gay and MUST tell everyone how wonderful it is. It may be stereotyping, but I'd say he's the norm. Totally over the top, in your face gay. Seems everywhere you go there has to be some aspect of gay in everything, TV, movies, news, etc. You'd think everyone was gay from the media but it's only 4-5% or so I've read.

I really don't have an issue with it, hell whatever floats your boat. I could care less who's boning who. But I don't like being constantly told how awesome it is or having it thrown in my face at every turn which seems to be what's happening here.

---

Hehe, man could I introduce you to some over the top straight dudes who do nothing but rub it in your face how many women they bone. Going around in their over the top traditionally masculine clothing and acting like they own the world. Not to mention how tired I am of seeing so many straight couples on TV.

Tired of having some other person's hetereosexuality thrown in my face.....

Oh, wait.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by restrac2000

Hehe, man could I introduce you to some over the top straight dudes who do nothing but rub it in your face how many women they bone. Going around in their over the top traditionally masculine clothing and acting like they own the world. Not to mention how tired I am of seeing so many straight couples on TV.

Tired of having some other person's hetereosexuality thrown in my face.....

Oh, wait.......

---

I get what you're saying but the difference is the percentages of society that are like that. You and I should be seeing heterosexuality everywhere since that's the norm and 95% of the population. But instead we see gay everywhere but it's only a small percentage of society so why does it dominate everything? Why is 4% of society dictating standards for anything?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nelsonccc

I get what you're saying but the difference is the percentages of society that are like that. You and I should be seeing heterosexuality everywhere since that's the norm and 95% of the population. But instead we see gay everywhere but it's only a small percentage of society so why does it dominate everything? Why is 4% of society dictating standards for anything?

---

We let them! Most Americans have become apathetic about everything. The Gay community has been repressed for too long and now they are making an effort to get noticed, get their issues on the books, get involved in politics, etc..

Ihad a buddy go to some community clean up day and complained that it was a bunch of gays folks, made him uncomfortable. Waah Waah Waah... Most folks had their church duties, their kid soccer games, etc... Too busy to participate in a good community project. At least the gay community cared enough to show up and do something good for all of us. If you get involved you will probably notice them less, as you realize they are just like us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abirken

Wow. I thought this kind of ignorance was long gone. Apparently not.

---

Two things... It's not ignorant and it's hardly long gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canyonphile

Alas, no.

Please take a look at this article, Byron. It's from UC Davis, from a PhD researcher. Worth a read, because he also discusses the flaws in the FRC's article that supposedly finds a large correlation between child molesters/pedophiles (which are not interchangeable terms, as you'll see in the article).

A couple of paragraphs from the article:





Interestingly, the BSA are mentioned in the article as it pertains to disallowing gays into their organization, so it is germane to the thread topic.

---

OK Sonja, and you too, Felicia...I thought what I said was pretty cut and dry and understandable but I'll elaborate...

It doesn't matter what Mr. PhD says, "Homosexuals and Pedophiles are two different species altogether". Consider that in the minds of a LOT of people, straight, heterosexual sex is "normal" and anything otherwise is not. Pedophilia, bestiality, heavy S&M, rubber suits...name your fetish. Homosexuality gets lumped into the mix. When some hear stories about a predator like Sandusky, or Jeffery Dahmer, or that freak last week that yanked that little 6 year old girl out of her bedroom, raped and killed her, anything not "normal" is to be feared. Even among those that have close friends who are gay, if they don't know the person and trust them completely, they will cast a weary eye.

I'm not a religious nut, I'm not religious at all. My youngest sister is as queer as a three dollar bill, and so is my cousin Bobby. They always have been...ever since they were 5 years old, everyone knew the deal. They're born that way. Nobody in my family busted their chops about it. It's all groovy. I have two gay clients that live together, Chris and Leonard. They are two of the most wonderful people I know...If I had any children I'd have no problem at all with them being alone with those guys. I KNOW them, I trust them.

However, I wouldn't allow my kids to join the scouts if they allowed openly gay scout masters. I wouldn't take the chance. Now that's just me, and go ahead, call me an idiot, moron, jerk, ignorant fool, whatever. The reality is there are millions of people who think this way. I think it quite the coincidence that this comes hot on the heels of the Sandusky debacle. I think the scouts organization is sending a message here..."We're looking out for your kids".

Go ahead and freak out, gnash your teeth, pull your hair, beat your chests, click you heels together three times and wish real hard that it would just go away, but it won't. I'm not trying to come down hard on you ladies, you know I don't mince words...it's just that homosexuality and pedophilia aren't too far separated in the minds of many. I'm not going to throw my trust in Mr. PhD. For all I know he may be a pedophile.

Funny, here I think like an overprotective parent, yet I have no children.

Quote:

---

If you believe homosexuality to be immoral, which I would think most religious people do, then why would you then want your son or daughter to participate in an organization that is catering to a perceived immoral behavior?

---

I don't know if that's true. It seems that most religious organizations now days believe that it's only the sex act that is immoral, not the attraction to someone of the same sex.

As pointed out above, the LDS church for example, does let homosexuals hold church positions as long as they don't act on their sex urges. The same is expected to all hetrosexual people as well. As long as they aren't married (and the main point of marriage is to have a family), all hetorsexuals are also expected to have no sexual relations.

Anyway, if I had a teenage daughter, I'd be a little worried about having her go camping with other hetrosexual men. It doesn't mean that anything would happen, but I'd still worry a bit. Same with a homosexual going camping with teenagers of the same sex.

As far as the boys go, it's mostly a non-issue unless people make one of it. When I started scouts, I don't even think I knew what a sexual orientation was. All scouts are supposed to remain without any type of sexual contact what-so-ever (or bad movies, internet, etc.), regardless of sexual orientation.

Quote:

---

Hehe, man could I introduce you to some over the top straight dudes who do nothing but rub it in your face how many women they bone.

---

Yes, there are many immoral people that are hetrosexual. Definately many of them are hypocrytical as well.

Quote:

---

Tired of having some other person's hetereosexuality thrown in my face.....

---

I was too. When I was in the military (joined on my 17th birthday), I was the only one who would admit to being a virgin. The other guys didn't think it was right and hired me a prostitute on one of our leaves and tried to get me with her. I was actually quite pissed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nelsonccc

I get what you're saying but the difference is the percentages of society that are like that. You and I should be seeing heterosexuality everywhere since that's the norm and 95% of the population. But instead we see gay everywhere but it's only a small percentage of society so why does it dominate everything? Why is 4% of society dictating standards for anything?

---

Because for centuries that have been marginalized as immoral, unnatural, etc. Society has intricate mechanisms (you have used a few) to normalize one type of behavior that is considered the desired outcome. The concept of normal isn't static though and changes over time. Unfortunately, even when people begin to accept a wider array of behaviors many of the old social pressures remain (most of us aren't even aware of how we play into them).

More succinct answer....we are in an era of change. Its slow and requires immense public attention and pressure. And I would say its not 4% of the population as more than half of the American population supports equality for homosexuals. Until policy and process reflects that equality it will likely remain a very public issue. At least I hope it does as I would rather see us change than repress the issue again because of a religious minority.

http://www.omfgod.com/wp-content/gal...y/jackson2.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nelsonccc

If you believe homosexuality to be immoral, which I would think most religious people do, ...

---

Perhaps, Christian, the "religious people" you hang out with think homosexuality is immoral, but the "religious people" I hang out with think it is a beautiful thing. Perhaps, you should say the "conservative religious people". Perhaps you carefully exclude anyone who accepts homosexuality as a normal expression of the human condition as being "religious". Certainly, many parts of the organized religious community have gone to great efforts to drive away homosexuals and persons who consider homosexuality within the realms of normal.

But what do I know, I live in Utah. I am informed by certain authorities that there are no homosexuals in Utah.

The Boy Scouts used to be a BIG TENT. For many, many years. I had a wonderful time in Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and Explorers. But at this point, I am ineligible. I am unwilling to profess a belief in Yahweh, thus, Tommy is excluded.

For me, not so much a problem. For my Dad, Eagle Scout, founder of at least 2 troops and lifelong scout leader, the religious extremism of the BSA National is a great sorrow in his later years.

My experience with my many canyoneering scout leader friends is that they are there to serve the boys of their communities. Being called to be a scout leader in Utah means many things, spending a bunch of your own money, and giving of time you might rather spend just with your own kids and their friends. But the obligation is to also include any kid who wants to join. And make it good for them. This is part of "The Work" - the work of making the world a better place. My experience of the scout leaders I know is that they don't give a flying fart about the National BSA loyalty oaths to Yahweh and the radical heterosexual agenda.

For this, and the work you do, Scout Leaders - I SALUTE YOU. :2thumbs::2thumbs::2thumbs:

BSA - training the bigots of tomorrow, one boy at a time.

Tom :moses:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byron

Now that's just me, and go ahead, call me an idiot, moron, jerk, ignorant fool, whatever.

---

I need your permission? :naughty:

Actually I don't need to. You clearly stated that it is an error to equate pedophiles with gays, but that millions of Americans do so; and then that you are one of them. Hmmmm.

If millions of people believe it, no matter how foolish, then you'll believe it too?

I don't get it. Makes no sense. (but that is our usual impasse).

Tom :moses:

Saw this on Facebook...

Attachment 56708

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratagonia

Perhaps, Christian, the "religious people" you hang out with think homosexuality is immoral, but the "religious people" I hang out with think it is a beautiful thing. Perhaps, you should say the "conservative religious people". Perhaps you carefully exclude anyone who accepts homosexuality as a normal expression of the human condition as being "religious". Certainly, many parts of the organized religious community have gone to great efforts to drive away homosexuals and persons who consider homosexuality within the realms of normal.

But what do I know, I live in Utah. I am informed by certain authorities that there are no homosexuals in Utah.

The Boy Scouts used to be a BIG TENT. For many, many years. I had a wonderful time in Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts and Explorers. But at this point, I am ineligible. I am unwilling to profess a belief in Yahweh, thus, Tommy is excluded.

For me, not so much a problem. For my Dad, Eagle Scout, founder of at least 2 troops and lifelong scout leader, the religious extremism of the BSA National is a great sorrow in his later years.

My experience with my many canyoneering scout leader friends is that they are there to serve the boys of their communities. Being called to be a scout leader in Utah means many things, spending a bunch of your own money, and giving of time you might rather spend just with your own kids and their friends. But the obligation is to also include any kid who wants to join. And make it good for them. This is part of "The Work" - the work of making the world a better place. My experience of the scout leaders I know is that they don't give a flying fart about the National BSA loyalty oaths to Yahweh and the radical heterosexual agenda.

For this, and the work you do, Scout Leaders - I SALUTE YOU. :2thumbs::2thumbs::2thumbs:

BSA - training the bigots of tomorrow, one boy at a time.

Tom :moses:

---

I never said that most religious people think it's immoral just that I would THINK that most religious people think it is. I haven't really had a lot of in depth discussions with my religious friends about it. Maybe I'm wrong, what do I know? I'm under the impression that most religious people think being gay is immoral and like I said I would think that's the majority?

I do know that I was a scout leader for 5 years and it like you said for sure it's alot of your own money and time. I used all my vacation time every year to do scouting things instead of family things. Paid dearly for that.

I certainly don't exclude gay people from my life, played softball last night (like I do every thursday) with a guy I went to graduate college with who's gay (flamboyantly so...). Now he's a bit over the top but he is the first to make a gay joke, great guy. I told him about this discussion and he can't believe the gays are making such a big deal about it. He thinks they are pressing an issue to make it mainstream that isn't necessary. He compared it to female football players. They may be perfectly capable of playing football but it's just not the time or the place. Pick your battles.

The BSA I earned my eagle in didn't seem like a bunch of homophobes. Times change, but I'm not giving up my hard earned award because of their narrowmindedness. I hope no one lumps me in with them because of it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mackgold46

Why don't they just start their own organization?

---

Why don't they just start their own country?

Why don't they just find their own planet?

Why do they have to be gay at all - some of us straight people just don't like it!

A more serious answer: they did. It is called the Boy Scouts of America, and like most things in America, it was started and run for many, many, many years by regular people, some of whom were gay, who kindly made things easier for their homophobe 'friends' by staying in the closet. Same things for us Atheists - many, many, many atheists contributed to the Scouting Movement; but now we are not allowed because we don't pass the loyalty test.

Another serious answer: because the BSA marketshare is so big, their tentacles into the community, even with non-homophobes and non-atheistphobes, that creating a new organization from scratch that includes all boys would be challenging. Certainly creating an organization JUST for homosexual and atheist lads would be counter-productive, in addition to being challenging.

Another serious answer: because inclusiveness is, or should be, part of being morally straight. To me, it is more important than ones orientation (rather than "sexual proclivities", since scout participants are too young to be having sex, and scout leaders are not in a (morally acceptable) position to have sex with participants, hetero or homo); or one's loyalty to a set of specific religious tenets.

Tom

And some BSA Councils have decided to be inclusive:

http://www.startribune.com/local/162817346.html?refer=y

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelly smith

Despite national policy banning gays, the largest Boy Scout group in Minnesota will stay inclusive

• Article by: KELLY SMITH , Star Tribune
• Updated: July 18, 2012 - 2:46 PM

Northern Star Council welcomes gay Scouts as BSA reaffirms policy to bar "open, avowed homosexuals."

Minnesota's biggest Boy Scout group said Tuesday that gays and lesbians remain welcome in its troops, despite a national announcement that the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) will continue to bar leaders, employees and members who are "open or avowed homosexuals."

"We're a reflection of the community," said Kent York, spokesman for the Northern Star Council, which has 75,000 Scouts in Minnesota and western Wisconsin. "Our commitment has been to reach out to all young people and have a positive influence."
York said that the Twin Cities-based Scout council, one of the nation's largest, will continue to follow a 12-year-old "inclusive leadership selection" practice.
When asked how they could differ from the national policy, York said that it had "worked for us."

"Every council is reflective of their community," he said.

The national policy says that while the Boy Scouts do not "proactively inquire about the sexual orientation of employees, volunteers or members, we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals or who engage in behavior that would become a distraction to the mission of the BSA."

The national organization, based in Texas, decided to stand by the policy after an 11-member committee spent two years reviewing it.

In a statement Tuesday, national officials announced that they unanimously agreed to keep the long-standing policy despite protests because it "remains in the best interest of scouting" and "reflects the beliefs and perspectives" of its members.

"While a majority of our membership agrees with our policy, we fully understand that no single policy will accommodate the many diverse views among our membership or society," Chief Scout Executive Bob Mazzuca said.

The statement added that the Boy Scouts don't criticize or condemn "those who wish to follow a different path," but that homosexuality should be left to parents, spiritual advisers and others.

Both the state and national Girl Scouts of the USA allow lesbian members and troop leaders in its ranks.

"We've always been inclusive," said Sara Danzinger of the Girl Scouts of Minnesota and Wisconsin River Valleys. She added that the Boy Scouts "are a brother organization, but this is just an area where we differ."
...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scott Card

:facepalm1: Private entity.... Supreme Court.....

---

Hmmm. But is the BSA truly "private" when they receive many benefits from the Federal gov't?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,164547,00.html

http://secular.org/news/government-f...s-unacceptable

http://www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/bsa.html