acco40

Yes, I feel that the "gay" issue has hit critical mass due to the fact that it will not be going away. Kahuna compared the issue to "women's rights" which I think is apt. I think that we as a society, will also find out that this will both have unforeseen benefits and negative consequences - just like the changing perceptions of what the role of women in society ought to be. With more women in the workforce, they are less dependent on someone else as a provider - that has boosted divorce rates and increased the amount of children raised in single parent homes. It also allowed many women to leave abusive relationships and has added an immense critical addition to our workforce expanding productivity. Anyone care to predict the effects that societal acceptance of gay marriage will have on our culture? I can't really think of much negative effects myself.

Don't get it backwards - the Scout should be taking merit badges that exposes/introduces them to many of the various professions that are out there. Don't think of a career and then pursue merit badges along those lines. Why limit career choices at the age of 13, 14 ,15 16 or even 17? Also, keep in mind that even if a Scout wants to become a carpenter, do body work, etc. they still benefit from basic English, science and mathematics courses. That is what our high schools should be teaching. Right now, I'd say 75% of community colleges and 50% of universities concentrate on getting freshmen up to speed on basic high school academics. Today's high school is equivalent to "yesterday's" junior high, today's college to yesterday's high school, etc. When my daughter, a recent high school graduate who is starting college in the fall told me that about they only thing they studied in history/social studies during high school and middle school was race relations, integration, etc. and barely anything about the American Revolution, Civil War, WWI/WWII, Korean Conflict, Vietnam, Industrial Age, etc. much less Greek, Roman or European history - well as my colleagues at work state - you raised 'em now you have to work with 'em!

Baloney. So you don't see it as hateful that the organization states that they believe that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight and in the Scout Law that a Scout be clean in word and deed, and that homosexuals do not provide a desirable role model for Scouts. But the ban on homosexuals had nothing to do with conduct - a celebate priest, if self declared as a homosexual, would have been denied membership. That was my beef. The simple workable solution is to get rid of these idiotic restrictions. Labelling folks as "fringe" is a red herring and making a blanket statement that they have no interest is the BSA is a lie at worst and just plain ignorant at best. For me, I don't demonize individuals that don't agree with me on this position but I also think the "just shut-up and let the situation resolve itself" response is very trite.

Not trying to pry but when you use the work "counselor" in your post, I'm guessing you are referencing a person who provides counseling (social worker of some sort) and not a camp counselor or merit badge counselor. Now, was your son removed due to an overt action or threat of an action or for a self expressed belief? If this is a physician-patient privilege issue, that is out of the realm of my expertise.

You do know why Baptists don't have sex standing up? Someone might think they are dancing. :-)

I went to quite of few DIBC (Dorchester International Brotherhood Camporee) in London, Ontario every May. Boy Scout troops from all over the northeast attend as well as members from Scouts Canada (a 100% coed organization). I was neutral on the concept for the BSA and had quite a few discussions with our Canadian friends about the plusses and minuses of having a coed Scouting program. The biggest drawback in their eyes was the need (and rightfully so) to have as a minimum at least one registered female adult go on any outing if a female scout attends. The burden was on the troop to find a volunteer - which most found difficult. I noticed that the younger boy didn't seem to be affected nor care about the subject either way. However, the "middle age" boys (13-15) seemed to be almost awestruck and socially awkward around the Canadian female Scouts. Was I really that clueless and tactless at that age? I sure hope not. The older boys, 16 & 17, seemed to enjoy it and pretty much act in a mature manner. I can say that for almost all of the boys above the age of 13, having female Scouts in our midst did change the dynamic. Not necessarily for better or worse, just different.

I don't recall the time I realized my sexual orientation but I do remember watching television with my four year old. The most censoring that I did with my son was during the news. I really didn't want him to see explicit "real" violence. One day, they were starting to show something about a bombing or something in Israel and I decided to turn the channel (I didn't have cable at the time). I came upon Entertainment Tonight or some such drivel and they showed some starlet in a bikini. I changed the channel about ten seconds later andall of sudden my son asked me to go back to Entertainment Tonight. His exact words to me were, "I like that but I don't know why." Most respected psychologists believe that we are all on a sexual spectrum. No one is 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual. Certain environments will influence our behavior - sexual and other. For example, usually in single sex environments (prisons, castaways, etc.) sexual activity does not cease.

Yeah, but just like the fact that a den meeting or troop meeting should not be the place for Mary Kay selling, asking if I want to buy some trinket for little Johnny's sport team or having an investment broker try to sell me securities - proselytizing doesn't have a place at most scout meetings. Go express your religious and moral beliefs elsewhere.

My boys didn't join the BSA to pad a resumé or impress a college admissions officer. I didn't volunteer to be a Den Leader and Scoutmaster for those reasons either. Personally, I don't care that much what others feel about the BSA. Both of my boys earned the Eagle Rank/Award but neither wear it on their sleeve so to speak. In there eyes, they did it because it was fun and maybe a touch because they knew it made mom & dad proud. :-)

Nonsectarian means I have to do my own typing. :-) Seriously, it simply means that the BSA does not favor one particular sect over another - be it Shias or Sunnis, Catholics or Protestants, etc. It does not imply that the BSA is or is not a Christian organization (while it does not imply it is not, it isn't). Folks can easily confuse nonsectarian, non-denominational and secular - but they have different meanings. Our friend Merlin may be considered part of a sect - and have no religious nor denominational affiliation. Secular is simply non-religious - usually describing an institution (not a person). For example, the Detroit Lions are a secular organization, the BSA is not. A Christian church may be non-denominational - such as the Church of Christ.

I've got a novel approached that worked wonders for another great institution that I believe in wholeheartedly - let's allow three-fifths of a gay member, adult and youth, to join the BSA. :-)

In January, the BSA said it was considering a plan to give sponsors of local Scout units the option of admitting gays as both youth members and adult leaders or continuing to exclude them. On Friday, the BSA said it changed course in part because of surveys sent out starting in February to about 1 million members of the Scouting community. The review, said a BSA statement, "created an outpouring of feedback" from 200,000 respondents, some supporting the exclusion policy and others favoring a change. "While perspectives and opinions vary significantly, parents, adults in the Scouting community and teens alike tend to agree that youth should not be denied the benefits of Scouting," the statement said. As a result, the BSA's Executive Committee drafted the compromise resolution. "The proposed resolution also reinforces that Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether heterosexual or homosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting," the statement said. The BSA described its survey as "the most comprehensive listening exercise in its history." In a summary of the findings, it said respondents overall supported the BSA's current policy of excluding gays by a margin of 61 percent to 34 percent, while a majority of younger parents and teens opposed the policy. It said overwhelming majorities of parents, teens and members of the Scouting community felt it would be unacceptable to deny an openly gay Scout an Eagle Scout Award solely because of his sexual orientation. Included in the survey were dozens of churches and other religious organizations that sponsor a majority of Scout units. The BSA said many of the religious organizations expressed concern over having gay adult leaders and were less concerned about gay youth members. Many Scout units are sponsored by relatively conservative denominations that have supported the ban on gays in the past  notably the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Southern Baptist churches. LDS spokesman Michael Purdy said Mormon leaders would study the new proposal. There was no immediate public reaction from Southern Baptist or Catholic officials who have been dealing with the BSA membership issue. The BSA survey tried to gauge the proposal's effect on financial support. Local Scout councils said 51 percent of their major donors opposed easing the ban, while a majority of Fortune 500 companies supported a change. In another revealing section of the survey, the BSA reported feedback from 30 national youth organizations and civic groups, many of them partners of the Scouts in various endeavors. Of the 30 organizations, 28 urged the Scouts to lift the ban, and many warned that their partnerships might end if the ban remained. The BSA also consulted four experts in the field of child sex abuse prevention. The four conveyed a "nearly universal opinion" within their field that homosexuality is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children. - Associated Press So, in essence, the BSA is striving to do what its members want - a membership that is diverse and not at all in lockstep in their thinking.

LDS spokesman Michael Purdy said Mormon leaders would study the new proposal. There was no immediate public reaction from Southern Baptist or Catholic officials who have been dealing with the BSA membership issue. The BSA survey tried to gauge the proposal's effect on financial support. Local Scout councils said 51 percent of their major donors opposed easing the ban, while a majority of Fortune 500 companies supported a change. In another revealing section of the survey, the BSA reported feedback from 30 national youth organizations and civic groups, many of them partners of the Scouts in various endeavors. Of the 30 organizations, 28 urged the Scouts to lift the ban, and many warned that their partnerships might end if the ban remained. The BSA also consulted four experts in the field of child sex abuse prevention. The four conveyed a "nearly universal opinion" within their field that homosexuality is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children. So for me, surveys be damned - the fact that a nearly universal opinion of BSA chosen expert stated that homosexuality is not a risk factor for sex abuse in children and the fact that the morality of homosexuality is a religious denominational context (some say yes, other no) and the fact that the BSA states that the scout is supposed to be in alignment with his parents and religious organization well, the homosexuality issue should be dead.

The resolution doesn't make sense if you look at it from a "is homosexuality a moral issue" perspective. However, viewed from the lens of a safety issue, i.e. from the belief that homosexual leaders (i.e. homosexual men specifically) are a safety threat, or to some public relations threat :-) - then it would make sense. I'm not saying I believe it is a good resolution or believe that homosexual leaders are a safety issue but I'm just trying to understand the logic. If passed, I like the idea that the BSA does not defacto exclude youth due to sexuality. This may be an attempt at compromise, a dirty work for the past 10 years or so in our current political climate.

A voice that will me missed. My condolences to his family and friends.

In whose eyes? In the eyes of the BSA and GSUSA there is a huge difference.

Methodists (and many of the other religions listed in this thread) also believe that sex outside of marriage is sinful - yet I don't see a clamoring to ban those Scouts and Scouters who have participated in sex outside of marriage. Why?

"I treat others the way they treat me . . " Merlyn, try treating others the way you would like to be treated. Doesn't always work but give it a chance. I do sympathize with your use of logic with those who vehemently refuse to understand logic. It must get tiresome. However, I must object to one of your comments. "You are a PERFECT example of how the BSA encourages bigotry against atheists." While it is difficult to determine the cause of bigotry against atheists, I would venture to guess that the BSA is not a primary cause - similar to bigotry against homosexuals, while the BSA may not do much to prevent such actions, I don't think it is a primary cause.

Simply put, some see homosexuality as immoral, others do not.

I'm confused. I was not aware that the BSA made or produced any food products, nonalcoholic beverages or other tangible personal property. So what would the impact be one way or the other?

The worrisome issue of bad press is not my concern. Right now, chartering organizations have the right to exclude non-catholics, females, etc. I believe they should still have the right to do so - at their own risk. I think, maybe naively, that there will be enough COs that would not turn away homosexuals that it would not become an issue.

Statistically, they found that the vast majority of those sexually abusing young males, ages 6 through 17 were right-handed. Therefore, I propose banning all self-proclaimed "righties" from the BSA! Protect our youth!

Gents, again, the reason for the BSA policy on homosexual members has absolutely nothing to do with safety. It has to do with self-perceived morality.

Keep in mind that even now, the BSA policy does not encourage gay or heterosexual members to "flaunt" their sexuality - that is not what the program is all about. If the BSA goes to a local option, I don't see any issue at all with camporees or "mixing" of units that may have different membership standards. Right now, many units do not allow female leaders of troops (SMs & SAs). Those units don't have an issue mingling with troops that do. Why should this be any different?

Let's take our heated passions out of this. Simply put, should an organization that has won court battles to proclaim themselves private and limit their membership as they see fit get tax breaks? I remember back when I lived in Missouri, a Ku Klux Klan (or similar type "hate" organization), volunteered to take care of a certain stretch of the highway (i.e. litter clean-up) and were denied that priviledge. Yes, we do live in a particular world these days. P.S. Missouri renamed the stretch of the highway the Klan was so interested in keeping clean the Rosa Parks freeway. When Nazi's wanted to perform similar service, they renamed the highway the Abraham Joshua Heschel highway. :-)