|
On June 08 2012 07:39 North2 wrote:
I actually voted No on this.
It's not that I have anything against gay people, it's just not the image they're trying to portray. It'd be like having one white guy in a completely black Catholic church. It's just gonna be awkward for both parties.
What? You're ok with the boy scouts not allowing gay people because it's "awkward."
The fuck kind of argument is that? The only people making things awkward are the homophobes and jackasses.
|
Was anyone here a Boy Scout in a troop that was openly anti-gay?
Maybe I had an odd troop, because we weren't church-sponsored, but we had at least one gay kid in our troop that we knew of. Just because the BSA formalized some anti-gay policy doesn't mean the uniforms wouldn't fit on gay kids or that they're coming around with the gaydar and kicking out anyone who pings. If your troop wasn't homophobic, my experience with mine, and what I'm guessing was other scouts' experience as well, was that they weren't going to kick you out over "policy."
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/06/12086046-boy-scouts-review-controversial-anti-gay-policy?lite
The new policy would throw out the national ban and allow local chartering organizations to decide whether or not they would accept gay youth and leaders, said Zach Wahls, an Eagle Scout who has advocated for the change, citing unidentified people he spoke to who attended the group's national annual meeting last week where the proposal was made. This change isn't nearly as big a change as anyone is making it out to be. The national organization is NEVER attending local scout meetings, telling you who can and can't be in your troop. If anyone has been anti-gay, it's been at the troop and council level, more local, and the change just keeps that in place.
All this does is maybe open up troops that were fine with gay scouts but for some reason not allowing it because that was "policy." Which I'm guessing is a very, very low number.
|
why would someone's sexual orientation be revealed when joining a group? WTF you're just a boyscout who cares if someone is gay or not?
also, the gay discrimination issue seems to be brought up way too often, especially from what i see in US related news articles. It's like the US preocupation, gay rights, gay marriage, gay bla bla bla. Society has other major problems in 2012, people should focus more on the stuff that matters
|
On June 08 2012 05:42 RodrigoX wrote:
The Boy Scouts of America banning gay people is 100 percent completely reasonable. It is a social club. A club with their own rules and policies. It is also completely legal because in their bi-laws they state no homosexuals should participate. I mean nobody allows open and practicing Muslims in Catholics parishes. White people in Black student Scholarship funds.
The boy scouts is an idea, and unfortunately homosexuals do not conform to that idea. If they wanted to be part of the Boy scouts they should you know, stop being gay.
This may seem to be a bigoted position, but it is a Christian organization. Homosexuality presents a lifestyle that is not Christian. I mean, why don't gay people start a Boy Scouts esq organization that accepts all kinds of ideals. It is a group for like minded people. Gay people are not like minded in the sense of the Boy Scouts of America.
Edit: It is wrong for the Transportation system to discriminant because it is not a private industry. It is a completely public industry. I mean the only reason a restaurant can not decline serving black people is because of the idea of a centrally planned economy. If it was a completely capitalist economy, discrimination if anything is enforced. I mean sure, if you wanted to make clubs and organizations publically owned then sure, lets have the government control everything. But if you still want an organization to be privately owned, and let them to do them, then leave them be to their own ideals.
Sure, but then they shouldn't receive tax money.
|
On June 08 2012 07:39 North2 wrote:
I actually voted No on this.
It's not that I have anything against gay people, it's just not the image they're trying to portray. It'd be like having one white guy in a completely black Catholic church. It's just gonna be awkward for both parties.
On June 08 2012 07:39 Psychobabas wrote:
I say No.
You can't compare for example the job market and the military to the boy scouts. Lets not demolish everything to fix a problem. I also anticipate a lot of predators to abuse something like this.
But again, tax payer dollars are going directly towards these groups.
It really comes down to a choice of keeping that funding and stopping their non-sense (the preferable choice, because scouts does a lot of good for youth) or keep their ways and find methods to get their own money.
On June 08 2012 07:55 Manimal_pro wrote:
why would someone's sexual orientation be revealed when joining a group? WTF you're just a boyscout who cares if someone is gay or not?
also, the gay discrimination issue seems to be brought up way too often, especially from what i see in US related news articles. It's like the US preocupation, gay rights, gay marriage, gay bla bla bla. Society has other major problems in 2012, people should focus more on the stuff that matters
Some people aren't legally "people" yet, so they can't focus on other stuff that really DOES matter more. Not sure why everyone can't just grow up, but maybe in a few decades when all the ol' folk are gone, society can actually grow and focus on harder issues.
|
United Kingdom20344 Posts
There are still rules regulating sexuality?
|
Sexual orientation has nothing to do with competence. The contrary is a barbarian idea from the past and should be eradicated. I fully support this resolution and I find it completely unfair that people can't join Boy Scouts simply because they are gay.
|
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me.
|
On June 08 2012 08:08 Savio wrote:
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me.
Why? Are all gay men sexual predators?
|
On June 08 2012 08:11 oldgregg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 08:08 Savio wrote:
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me. Why? Are all gay men sexual predators?
Are all heterosexual men predators? I said I would feel the same either way.
That's why I said it seems pretty simple. Assuming that neither heterosexuality or homosexuality is associated with more "predatorness" or more pedophilia, I would feel the SAME sending my daughter with heterosexual men as I would sending my son with homosexual men.
|
IMO the biggest voice which would make any change, lasting or not, is the customers.
Whatever policy the Boy Scouts decide upon, if their customer base does not dwindle but in fact remains stable or grows, then that would be a fairly accurate indicator on how the public as a whole feels regarding the situation.
|
On June 08 2012 08:08 Savio wrote:
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me.
Ehhhh just because you let gays join up doesn't mean that there's going to suddenly be close bodily contact going on.
|
im kinda happy i live in a country in which such situation would just make huge LOL.
on the side note what would happen if suddenly everyone would start being homo ?XD world would die?
|
On June 08 2012 08:18 Loanshark wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 08:08 Savio wrote:
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me. Ehhhh just because you let gays join up doesn't mean that there's going to suddenly be close bodily contact going on.
Hence, why I would feel the same sending my daughter with heterosexual men as I would feel sending my son with homosexual men. Either way, there shouldn't be contact, but the worry would be there.
Which is why I would feel the same either way.
Its not a very complicated concept. It basically means having the same concern for homosexuality as you do for heterosexuality.
|
While I have nothing against gay people and support gay marraige, I think that the scouts should be able to decide on a troop by troop basis who they want their scout leader to be. Gay, Straight, or whatever. Its all about the person to me, people aren't defined by who they are attracted to.
|
On June 08 2012 08:15 Savio wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 08:11 oldgregg wrote:On June 08 2012 08:08 Savio wrote:
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me. Why? Are all gay men sexual predators? Are all heterosexual men predators? I said I would feel the same either way. That's why I said it seems pretty simple. Assuming that neither heterosexuality or homosexuality is associated with more "predatorness" or more pedophilia, I would feel the SAME sending my daughter with heterosexual men as I would sending my son with homosexual men.
Well according to you yes. You don't have a very high opinion of men do you?
|
One can only hope, that 138 people who voted no, are trollin... Sadly, that's never the case 
|
On June 08 2012 08:21 NoDDiE wrote:
im kinda happy i live in a country in which such situation would just make huge LOL.
on the side note what would happen if suddenly everyone would start being homo ?XD world would die?
World would at least be a good place for a bit.
|
On June 08 2012 08:25 oldgregg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 08:15 Savio wrote:On June 08 2012 08:11 oldgregg wrote:On June 08 2012 08:08 Savio wrote:
I would feel as awkward sending my sons to go sleep in a tent with gay grown men as I would sending my daughter of the same age to sleep in a tent with heterosexual grown men.
Seems like the BSA might have a reason to strike the resolution down.
Doesn't seem all that complicated to me. Why? Are all gay men sexual predators? Are all heterosexual men predators? I said I would feel the same either way. That's why I said it seems pretty simple. Assuming that neither heterosexuality or homosexuality is associated with more "predatorness" or more pedophilia, I would feel the SAME sending my daughter with heterosexual men as I would sending my son with homosexual men. Well according to you yes. You don't have a very high opinion of men do you?
I'm a psychiatrist so I deal with people who had the worst done to them. Puts a person on guard after a while.
|
Well, now this is awkward.
Why has no one figured out that if there was a scout leader who really wanted to molest kids, he'd just, you know, lie? "Oh yeah, totally straight. Long term girlfriend. No 12 year old diddling at all, no desire to whatsoever!". It's not a safety net. It's saying "Gay values are not our values" when there really are no "gay values" because homosexuals aren't exactly a single unified and uniform group. Wow, how useful, and it appreciate your support.
How about let's be honest here: "I think 2 guys having sex is icky, and icky things mean I don't want to think about it because I'm very self centered and can't empathize or have any form of social interactions that aren't 100% agreeable with my self identity. I'm fragile you see."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
