Isn't it interesting that National chose this issue to make a big, expensive, public stand?
If they were equally fervent about keeping out other "immoral" elements, as they are about homosexual leaders, but they don't.
There are equally tiny elements in the adult leadership that are quite frankly racist, militarist, anti-semitic, abusive, fudimentalist, snobs, and what-have-you, and yet National hasn't made a big public show of hunting them down and keeping them out.
Could it be that National assumed this would get them a lot of free publicity, but are suddenly surprised when much of it was bad publicity, and opened Scouting up to ridicule?
Could it be they thought this would raise them a lot money and instead it is costing them a lot in money, sponsorship, etc.?
If Scouting were just this fervent about anything else except raising money, I might understand their position on homosexuals. But they are not!
Catholics and Jews don't try to convert or recruit young men into their "lifestyles". Docotors and lawyers don't. Why can't we assume the same about homosexual leaders?