Interesting Fox News Poll

[scoutldr]

NEWS FLASH: Gays and lesbians ARE serving in the military. I work with them every day. As long as they are professional and respectful, and do their jobs well, the question never comes up. If they were to engage in "PDA" (public display of affection), they would be hauled in and disciplined. But so would the heterosexuals. Most commanders just choose to look the other way. Yes, females are now on all of our ships, except submarines and the SEALS. The result of that was the pregnancy rate of unmarried sailors skyrocketed. Millions of dollars were spent to reconfigure ships to provide separate berthing areas. Ships are undermanned because pregnant sailors are immediately reassigned to a shore assignment. This means that someone else has to take her place at sea. This is patently unfair. In my opinion, there is no place for a single parent in the military. It is IMMORAL to bring a child into the world, knowing that you will be absent from their lives for half of their lives, 6 months at a time, or as an E-1, 2 or 3, you are financially unable to care for it without going on food stamps. It shows a lack of judgement and maturity, qualities that I don't want in someone I count on to save my life. Females who become pregnant out of wedlock and their male partners should be immediately given an Administrative Discharge.

 

What disturbs me is the opinion of some that homosexuals are, de facto, immoral, however nothing is said about fornicators, adulterers, etc. Is someone from Irving going to Cancun, Myrtle Beach or Miami during spring break, taking names so they can be added to the "banned from Scouting" database?

 

As I have said before in other posts, why does the BSA selectively enforce it's value system? Are some values more "morally straight" than others?

[KoreaScouter]

If you read my previous post carefully, I didn't respond to 2CD's comments from a gay-bashing standpoint. I merely wanted to counter the assertion that young military members are amoral, and that our collective military value system is as well.

 

Of course there are gays and lesbians in the military, and there are some thieves, too, and some perverts, and some wife beaters, and some child abusers. Whether one agrees with the don't-ask-don't-tell policy or not, their service will be quickly terminated if they publicly "come out", the same as others in categories deemed unfit for service will be. You can argue all day whether or not it should be that way, but that's the way it is.

 

In the commands I've been in, leaders didn't look the other way when there was any situation that could have been prejudicial to good order and discipline, whether it was related to sex, finances, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc. Things are a lot more complicated now than they were 26 years ago when I first joined, and it makes it more difficult to maintain situational awareness on everyone, but I think they try mightily.

 

What they aren't, and neither are BSA senior leadership, is clairvoyant. If a married leader is fooling around with his secretary, driving under the influence, shoplifting, or smoking dope, Irving will never know unless he gets caught or it becomes a public scandal. Then, they deal with it. What more can we ask?

 

KS

 

 

[CRANEACE]

I'm a little confused. Moral/immoral?

If that is the issue, then would you ban a "straight" man or woman who has cheated on their spouse? Is that not "immoral?" whether it's the Military or BSA, would there be many mambers if you banned this group due to immorality?

[Rooster7]

What disturbs me is the opinion of some that homosexuals are, de facto, immoral, however nothing is said about fornicators, adulterers, etc...As I have said before in other posts, why does the BSA selectively enforce it's value system? Are some values more "morally straight" than others?

 

Scoutldr,

 

Please examine the issue a little more closely. Obviously, the things that you have listed are immoral. Furthermore, if a someone was to flaunt such behavior, I am confident that many, if not most chartering organizations, would take action against that individual. So, so why are homosexuals any different? The difference is - Heterosexual adulterers have not formed a special group to force their way into the BSA as accepted members!

[kasane]

Further to Rooster7's last comment "Heterosexual adulterers have not formed a special group to force their way into the BSA as accepted members! "

 

Well, in case no one was actually looking closely at the adults in scouting - heterosexual adulterers are already in the BSA (as well as alcoholics, spouse batterers, thieves, embezzlers, etc). Apparently adultery is a given in socieiy . Many people wouldn't pass scrutiny as a leader if being an adulterer (past or present) was a criteria for rejection in the BSA.

 

My husband came back from a campout (as a parent - preleadership) complaining about the behaviour of two registered leaders (scoutmaster and committee member), both married (not to each other) (one male, one female). While public displays of affection were not apparent, the closeness of the two (the little private moments, personal time together, little asides, etc) did not go unnoticed by any adult on that trip and by our son (who was 11 at the time - boy did we have to sort out some questions from him - and he was one the most clueless kids we had). The two adults in question also had sons on the trip - I don't know how much they noticed, but if my son figured out something was up - I am sure they had something to say to the other parent when they got home.

 

My husband was livid ("I don't care what consenting adults do - not in front of the kids!") and signed up as leader right away. We didn't change troops, just leadership. Both leaders were gone shortly after (and their marriages about a year after that).

 

If adultery is the criteria for keeping homosexuals out of the BSA, then it should be applied across the board to all members (and professionals if you want to keep that standard). If homosexuals are thieves, then all thieves should be kept out (bad example for the kids). But then how could we tell who was a thief (criminal record?) or an adulterer (family counselling records, finger pointing in the community?)

 

Once you start removing those issues (adultery, thieves, liars, cheats -all of which I feel fit under the "not morally straight"). Morally straight is more than not having sex with someone of the same gender. Morals keep you straight in the sense of lying, cheating, stealing, etc.

 

I just love throwing spanners into the works.