Boy Scouts of America and Homosexuals - Page 2

On October 09 2012 00:47 neversummer wrote:
First of all I don't think anyone is supporting the Boy Scouts of America.

Secondly I applaud them for maintaining their position in the midst of criticism from the community; I've never really cared for what is "politically" correct and quite frankly I don't think gay men should be prancing around with large groups of 8-10 year old boys.

On October 09 2012 00:45 micronesia wrote:
When you say don't support the BSA, do you mean don't support your local troops, or just don't publicly support the national organization? Keep in mind it's mainly the idiots at the national level that are making such a big deal out of this... the local troops and in many cases county-level leaders are not proponents of this policy.

On October 09 2012 01:21 rackdude wrote:
This should really be closed and be resubmitted in a more civil manner as the way it stands is not giving a good discussion, rather just huge amount of disgusting mudslinging. It's a real issue and as an Eagle Scout I am concerned by how the national leadership does some stuff that I do not agree with, but this is not the way to discuss it.

On October 09 2012 01:21 MooMu wrote:


As long as they are affiliated, no support for any of them.

I know people will differ like those good Catholics that still retain their faith in the Church but support none of their edicts. Andrew Sullivan comes to mind right away. In any case, voice your displeasure at all times.

On October 09 2012 01:26 MooMu wrote:


This ain't personal. Understand your status is being sullied by your leadership and they're the ones slinging the nastiest mud.

When I was a younger Boy Scout, we also didn't mention politics or even differing religions for that matter, because we knew that we each had our separate opinions on the matter and knew to let the parents talk to thier kids about those issues. BSA expects Mom and Dad to explain how sex works and what differing political opinions and religious beliefs are and what homosexuality is. Someone who is openly expressive of their sexuality, in my opinion, should not be tolerated, hetero- or homosexual; Boy Scouts isn't the place for it. There is a double standard on this, as I heard far more than my fair share of heterosexuality (boys will be boys...), but I disapprove of it just as ardently. Basically, BSA doesn't want to deal with any of it, because they believe it's not their place. To be honest, a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is acceptable here in my opinion, for any sexual orientation. I know it's not popular, but those are family issues (homosexuality, teenage promiscuity, etc.), and they should remain as such if you ask me.

I "shrug" at the notion that Johnny is gay or Timmy is sexually promiscuous or Spike is Muslim. Yes, I'll disagree with them on a moral level. But we can still be in the same Patrol together and get along just fine because we can set those things off to the side when we get together for meetings and go on campouts, etc.

"Recently, a Scout proactively notified his unit leadership and Eagle Scout counselor that he does not agree to Scouting's principle of 'Duty to God,' and does not meet Scouting's membership standard on sexual orientation," the statement reads. "While the Boy Scouts of America did not proactively ask for this information, based on his statements and after discussion with his family, he is being informed that he is no longer eligible for membership in Scouting."

On October 09 2012 01:31 micronesia wrote:

The problem with this mindset is that you are now playing chicken with a few idiots who will probably not yield any time soon. A 'no support for anything BSA related' stance will more likely mean the destruction of an otherwise very good youth program (of which there is no substitute) than result in a reversal of this backwards policy.

If you have a way to fix the problem then go for it, but I don't think this will work.

On October 09 2012 01:45 MooMu wrote:


Nothing on the scale of the Boy Scouts but alternatives do exist.

Camp Fire USA? Some limited Science-oriented organizations that do outdoorsy stuff as well.

On October 09 2012 01:35 cLAN.Anax wrote:


That doesn't excuse you from an awful, biased OP. Your rhetoric is clearly showing, and I would kindly ask you to refrain from it if you're going to initiate threads on emotionally-divisive issues such as this.


I said this back in the "Gay Scout Resolution" thread, and I'll re-post it here with a small addition.



As for this particular story, I actually do not believe that the Scouts rejected this man's Eagle Scout award for him being homosexual, but probably because he was vocal, public, or both about his homosexuality. Given the nature of his Eagle Project too, I imagine he used this "tolerance wall" as a pretty blatant way to come out about it.

From the article in the OP:



The most personal questions I ever got asked about when I went to my Eagle Board of Review, were if I was active in my religion, as per the Scout Oath ("To God and my Country") and if I would strive to remain "Reverent," as part of the Scout Law. I think Mr. Andersen is an honest and exemplary young man whose project, on its face, sounds worthy of recognition. I have no reason to believe he's a horrible person or anything like that. But he willfully disobeyed one of Scouting's most important tenets. Because of this, I stand by the Board's decision.

On October 09 2012 00:51 Zealos wrote:

You're literally the worst type of person this planet has. I would honestly like to see what kind of fucked up logic you use to defend this comment.

On October 09 2012 00:53 BlackPanther wrote:


Not only are you an idiot, but you're also a douchebag. This kind of trash shouldn't be allowed on TL.

On October 09 2012 00:53 ElvisWayCool wrote:


Yeah, and heterosexual men shouldn't be able to do anything with little girls either... Are you joking man? Prancing? Really?


This whole thing is stupid, they're just being homophobes. They can do what they want, but that doesn't mean they should hate.

And the OP's language is a little vulgar.... Doesn't really help make your point imo, kind of hurts it actually.

On October 09 2012 00:59 Cereb wrote:



Wow. I didn't think people would be this dedicated to displaying their ignorance on a forum like TL. Pretty interesting actually!


You do realise that pedophilia and homosexuality has nothing whatsoever to do with each other, right?

Does this also mean that the heterosexual man/woman can't take care of kids of the opposite sex?



As for the topic, it really blows my mind that there are some parts of the western world where this ridiculous attitude to your fellow man still exists. Even more so when it comes to a group of such official status.

On October 09 2012 01:12 Zealos wrote:

Agreed, it's the worst part of democracy too. The thought that people like this vote makes me quite pessimistic for the human race.

On October 09 2012 01:49 micronesia wrote:

Surely the BSA is not the only youth program that uses outdoorsy activities to try and help develop young men into fine adults.

However, just because some alternatives exist in some cases doesn't mean my point doesn't stand. There is a need for things like the BSA, and while some changes are clearly needed, I don't think a 'boycott' is the right way to go about it.

Hm boycott looks kind of like boy scout.

On October 09 2012 00:47 neversummer wrote:
First of all I don't think anyone is supporting the Boy Scouts of America.

Secondly I applaud them for maintaining their position in the midst of criticism from the community; I've never really cared for what is "politically" correct and quite frankly I don't think gay men should be prancing around with large groups of 8-10 year old boys.

On October 09 2012 01:50 MooMu wrote:


They can do whatever they want, and I said I respect their decision as a private organization. I don't respect their policies, and hence the group.

Now, they're silence on sexual molesters in their midst (Canada - don't know about the States)... that's a decision or lack thereof that I don't respect.

On October 09 2012 01:50 MooMu wrote:


They can do whatever they want, and I said I respect their decision as a private organization. I don't respect their policies, and hence the group.

Now, they're silence on sexual molesters in their midst (Canada - don't know about the States)... that's a decision or lack thereof that I don't respect.

On October 09 2012 02:00 haffy wrote:


Is it a private organization? They hold events in public buildings and military land for next to nothing. I don't know what the laws are in the U.S, but I'm kind of sure in the U.K that would make it a public organization.

Also are atheists really not allowed to join either lol?

On October 09 2012 02:00 haffy wrote:


Is it a private organization? They hold events in public buildings and military land for next to nothing. I don't know what the laws are in the U.S, but I'm kind of sure in the U.K that would make it a public organization.

Also are atheists really not allowed to join either lol?

On October 09 2012 02:01 cLAN.Anax wrote:


If you don't respect their policies, but decide to make a thread about a topic pertaining to said organization, then be more neutral and less vitriolic in the OP.

As for suspected sexual molesters, that's a differently issue entirely. It's important, no doubt, but separate nonetheless.

On October 09 2012 02:03 deth2munkies wrote:
Boy Scouts are a Christian organization. That's how they were founded, that's how they're run. Christianity forbids homosexuality very explicitly.

That'd be like not letting a conservative Christian into a leadership position of an organization devoted to Atheism. It is and always has been a non-issue.

On October 09 2012 02:08 MrF wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

You put together a fair point but the problem is by that logic anyone who "displays their sexuality" is subject to the same treatment, so if someone wanted to say announce their getting engaged would that elicit the same response, if its a hetero marriage probably not, if it's a gay marriage I would bet that it would. The problem with "don't ask don't tell" is that "telling" consists of not hiding the fact that you are a homosexual to the world. Sure as a straight man I can say I don't go around shoving my sexuality in other peoples faces but that's because I am a part of the accepted majority, however if a gay person is known as being gay they are suddenly "openly expressive of their sexuality" I am completely open about my sexuality but it's not an issue because I'm not gay. I would understand if there was a candidate who was going around showing pictures of him having sex with other men, or women for that matter, and he got denied/kicked out, but all this kid did was let his leaders know he was gay.

That being said BSA is a private organization and it is perfectly within their right to have standards regarding sexual orientation, religion or whatever they choose, just don't pretend that it's merely about being open about your sexuality, gay or straight, because it's not.