Boy Scouts

Crockett

Crockett

5,000+ Posts
I have little hostility towards gays, but I love Boy Scouts the way it is.

The numbers in Boy Scouts are with the youthful and pre-sexual. Scouts age out at 18 and most have accomplished their ultimate goals, obtained their Eagle Scout rank or turned attention to other activities a year or two before then. No doubt the boys have sexual impulses. Few are sexually active either hetro or homo and if they do have gay inklings, there is still plenty of time to clarify their sexual orientation.

Can't we just leave sex out of the picture and let them engage in wholesome, age-appropriate,leadership-building activities without worrying about who is straight and who is not?

Why do the kids engaged in activities that make them better citizens, leaders and family members have to get caught in a crossfire between conservative and liberal activists? Can't they just be pre-sexual kids who don't yet need to come out of the closet or demonstrate heterosexual prowess?
 
I am an Eagle Scout. While I tend to err to the side of those that want to ban gay leaders or adult troop support, I do not agree with banning gay Scouts themselves.

Simply put, any gay kid will either get teased or ridiculed, causing him to flee the troop; or, a gay Scout will overcome the social obstacles of his sexual orientation and move up through the ranks like any other Scout. Sexual orientation should have no bearing on allowing youth to learn survival skills, patriotic and civic duties.

Holy hell, the crap that my Troop got away with (or didn't). If there were an openly gay Scout, I admit there might have been some insults flung around under the radar, but then again, we would've teased and harassed a red-head or the tubby kid just as much. Boy Scouts was just as much wolf pack fighting as it was a learning experience. But, maybe I was just aligned with a group of kids that had their heads firmly planted on their shoulders. Still didn't keep us from burning down a summer camp or istituting our own form of corporal punishment to other Scouts when the amount of whining and cussing became too much for even pimply-faced 14 year olds to take.
 
BSA has already cleared the legal hurdles with respect to banning gays. There is some clique in the leadership that has an agenda despite being rebuffed several times now. If there is such a large group of LGBT support then let them generate their own group. There is absolutely nothing keeping LGBT folks from sponsoring their own organization that teaches camping and such.

This is a slippery slope if ever there was one. The LGBT community will be clamoring for adults to be accepted if the BSA votes to allow gay youth.

If the youth feels so strongly that he must openly acknowledge his homosexuality then he is making an informed choice. The BSA has always been based on a certain moral code. Homosexuality is not in keeping with that code.

This is just one more effort to paint the LGBT community as a normal model for family and behavior. After all, if the BSA, a Rockwell-esque version of American virtue, can accept gays then heck, being gay is as American as apple pie.

This 'behind the times' blurb that these idiots keep spouting is really pissing me off. It has nothing to do with 'times' but a choice to join an organization that strives toward values you support and believe in. Principal among them is that heterosexuality and marraige between a man and a woman is the norm and what is best for kids, family and society.
 
From the one and only boy scout meeting I went to as a kid I left thinking that the whole organization was gay.
 
I am an Eagle Scout and signed the petition to deny sexual deviants participation in the BSA. The BSA is what it is and there is no reason to have to change the oath or creed.
However, this is America and if sexual deviants want to create an organization with lesser values for young men, then they should do so.
Perhaps NAMBLA can help them get it started.
 
It doesn't matter if there are openly gay football players or any other adult. The BSA specifically existst to provide a venue for boys to gather, learn and grow within a specific and deliberate culture of morality. It's not about camping or knot tying. It's essence is its values.

If it is not your set of values...go start your own organization, don't corrode ours.
 
Larry's questions are the same ones that came to mind for me.

Put another way, what specific value promoted by BSA would exclude a gay person?

I've seen no evidence that gays are any more virtuous or villainous than any other group of humans.
 
Larry forgot the oath, which includes "morally straight".
Cant be a sexual deviant AND be morally straight. Sorry.

Like I said earlier, sexual deviants (including both adult and youth) are free in this country to start their own organization and go on camping trips together.
I have no problem with it.
 
From BSA: Being morally straight means to live your life with honesty, to be clean in your speech and actions, and to be a person of strong character.

Doesn't mention anything about sexual orientation.
 
By his "own definition?" I don't see that definition in anything Larry has written.

You have chosen to hang your hat on the notion of "deviation." Please explain the moral implications of your usage so that I may be able to understand it.

I don't see any inherent deviation from moral straightness in the gay population. Do you? Or do you just consider homosexuality itself to be immoral? If so, why not just say it?

Please clarify what you mean.
 
Since Ivan keeps using his "sexual deviant" ********, I thought it finally deserves a response. The definition of deviant is a practice outside of the societal norm. So, one could look at that and say any sexual practice that does not involve a man and a woman in the missionary position is deviant. Ivan's sex life must be pretty boring.

To me, the social norm should be having sex with someone you love and are attracted to. Not to mention being true to yourself. That is what seems normal to me....not deviant.

And thanks to Spider for linking the values of the BSA. Reading through that makes it seems to be against the BSA values to exclude gays.
 
My only problem with BSA is that they wont come out and say that they don't like homosexuality and therefore dont want it around their kids. They like to beat around the bush and use words like "values" and "moral straightness" even though their own definitions of these terms have nothing to do with sexual orientation. Just come out (see what I did there) and admit that you dont like the icky creepy gays and I will probably make fun of your straight club, but I will also defend your right to have the club the way you want.
 
Never had time for boy scouts and I always thought the hats were a little, well hell, I don't know how to say it PC, I thought the hats were gay.

I don't know how a gay man could be involved in boy scouts don't you have to be a parent? I guess they could have adopted....

I would not have a problem with a gay parent with adopted kids being with my kids, a gay Den leader with no kids in the pack, GTFO, would or should not happen, it won't happen with my kids. No ******* way.........Hell, I have a problem if the Den leader is straight and doesn't have kids in the pack.....at some point common sense has to kick in.
 
I have no problem stating that homosexuals have no place in the BSA. I signed a petition to that effect. I do not believe any sexual deviance has a place when teaching young men how to be morally straight.
Yes, homosexuality is as much of a sexual deviance as pedophilia, beastiality etc. No difference.
I
 
Thanks for being clear, Ivan.

I was going to ask how intolerance fits into moral straightness, but if you view homosexuality the same as you do pedophilia then, of course, you won't tolerate it.

I think you're way off, but that's your right.

Larry,
Great contributions to this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top