Okay, cjmiam. Let's get a few things straight.
So, It sounds like you did your homework. I was not looking for chapter and verse on the "clean" thing. I failed to find how often I'm supposed to clip my toenails, as well. My point with the "clean" is that all people understand all points of the Scout Law in their own way. We all strive to be trustworthy and loyal, but clearly we must all interpret this differently because good scouts all over the world display varying levels of trustworthiness and loyalty.
As for the reverent part, you have done your homework in saying that the book reads A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others. I still maintain, however, that this is very subjective. Everyone is reverent towards God in a different way.
The other points of the Law are freely interpreted by members, as well. Are scouts being loyal when they turn their backs on members of their group who share different opinions? Are labeling and prejudice examples of courtesy? As you can see, we all have our own way of interpreting these ideas.
For the record, a state-level BSA official has agreed with me that the values held within the Oath and Law are, and I quote, "highly subjective and open to interpretation."
No, I am not trying to figure out the meaning of "is." However, this very conversation demonstrates how we have each interpreted the Oath and Law differently. Obviously, if we both had the same definitions of loyalty, kindness, and reverence we wouldn't be having this disagreement. I consider you to be a good Scout, though I never met you, and I consider myself to be a good Scout. If two good Scouts disagree on the interpretation of the Oath and Law, then the values within must be subjective to some degree. As you said, we won't always agree on everything.
Ahem. "A very good resource about what the BSA thinks a good family is." Since when is it hte BSA's job to decide what makes a good family? By suggesting that families with a father and a mother mliving together with children are the only type of acceptable families and that other styles are less than acceptable, you alienate many families. In fact, a closer examination reveals that no two families are alike. I was also unable to find any family that perfectly exemplified the BSA's ideal family. News flash! If a member of your family announced that he was gay, the right thing for you to do would be to accept and love him. Similarly, if a family associated with the BSA has homosexual parents, the right thing to do is to acept and love them. "Father and Mother" families indeed are most common, but ignoring the fact that other families exist and refusing to accept them is shameful and contrived.
My point still stands firm because you have failed to tell me how homosexuality is inconsistent with the Oath and Law. Which points of the Law and which phrases of the Oath say that you can't be homosexual? A Scout vows to live by the Oath, not by the handbook. Furthermore, the Oath and Law have never been changed and the handbook is in its eleventh edition. My question asked for specific points of the Oath and Law that would prohibit homosexuality, not for the phrases in the hanbook that you so eagerly quote as if it were Shakespeare.
Your final paragraph is inexcusable. The phrase morally straight has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with sexuality. Morality is the distinction between right and wrong, and having straight morals means that you understand this difference and listen to your heart when you're doing the wrong thing. Do you actually think that the founders of the BSA meant "not gay" when they wrote "morally straight"?
We don't have to agree on everyting, I agree with you there. Our disagreement as good scouts demonstrates that the Law and Oath are indeed subjective, and the failure of you and BSA officials to explain how the Oath and Law are inconsistent with homosexuality show that they have fabricated values.