Homosexuals in Scouting

[johndaigler]

Trailpounder - interesting thought, but the Catholic Church's abuse issues are generally brought up by posters arguing against allowing homosexuals into the BSA. You're sounding a bit paranoid, when you write that "activists" are out to "target" you!! BTW, why is "activist" a bad word?? Why are people with opinions that differ from yours labeled with such s-c-a-r-y words??

 

Rooster - I always enjoy reading your words. Don't agree with them, but they make me think. Next time try comparing homosexuals to something less vile than murderers, child molesters, and animal lovers. For me, the credibility of your comments are threatened, because you rarely recognize that homosexuals have other character traits than their sexual orientation. I'm sure there's more to each person than just that . . .

 

Bugler, I'll get back to you after Thanksgiving. I have to go home to my Mom's house to get my old High School Latin books so that I can figure out what you said to me!!!!!!!!!

 

sum es est . . .

 

jd(This message has been edited by johndaigler)

[Rooster7]

Believe it or not, I do recognize homosexuals as having other traits. I'm certain that I've had associations with many more homosexuals than I probably realize. Still, not every relationship I've had with a homosexual was unknown to me. I know men who struggle with homosexuality. They know what I'm about, and I know them pretty well too. They're believers. No doubt in my mind, that they have sought Christ and are continuing to seek His mercy and love. I respect these men and I understand their struggle with sin is not unlike mine.

 

My comparisons with bestiality was for a purpose. It was not meant to cause revulsion, but to show a parallel between two sexual perversities that are "victimless". Just because the parties are consenting, that doesn't make the activity moral. I have sins that I view as being just as dark. I am not judging those who fall prey to sexual temptations, even those that are considered to be perverse. I am calling sin - sin. As to how folks will be judged, that is God's purview. Yet, I am confident in the salvation of all those who earnestly seek Christ as Lord and Savior.

[planoscout]

It just seems to me that we shouldn't judge people based on their sexuality. I've known plenty of homsexuals who are terriffic people. In fact they are better than some straight people that I know.

While, I am not saying that the Bible is wrong, in fact I think the Bible has extremely terrific examples of how to live life. If more people emulated Jesus's life, the world would be a much better place, and the same goes for almost all religions. But homosexuals are just as good or bad as other people. They can still teach boys leadership, and how to live a good life of service. And if they can do that there is no reason to not allow them to participate in Boy Scouts. The same goes for beastiality. Whall I don't agree, and am repulsed by the practice, it doesn't make a person "evil".

[Lone]

Scouts are supposed to be MORALLY PURE. Among other things, that means chaste. I'd be surprised to find troop leaders who live with their girlfriends. Who we leave our impressionable young men with DOES matter.

 

There's another consideration. If BSA allows those practicing homosexuality in leadership, it will eventually go the way of Girl Scouts -- in another 10 years, AHG will be the premier scouting organization for girls. Nobody wants to see that happen with BSA.

 

Despite what government schools teach, the vast majority of Americans do NOT recognize homosexuality as merely another alternative.

 

[johndaigler]

Lone, WELCOME!

 

"Morally Pure" is pretty high standard!

Do we uninvite "cohabiting" Scout Leaders??

Do we have a National Policy that precludes their joining?

I had to google AHG - and it took several tries and specific keywords...isn't it a trumped up American Doll Fan Club?? I didn't stay long enough to find outdetails, but what would they have to do with the Girls Scouts and any issues the GSA faces, homosexuality or otherwise? It seems you're hyper-extrapolating a few facts

[WAKWIB]

AHG is a reference the American Heritage Girls.

A quote from their web-site:

(http://www.ahgonline.org/)

"American Heritage Girls Organization is a scouting program for girls that supports the traditional values of God, Family and Country. AHG's programming promotes the Judeo-Christian values upon which our country was founded and strives to enhance the girls life experiences with fun filled activities supervised by trained adults, supported by family members and implemented by members. AHG's programming provides life skills, leadership skills and character building through a traditional troop setting."

 

If I had a daughter, this sounds like a program I would consider involvement with. From what I have heard over the years, it seems as if GSA has lost her direction to some degree. However, I am rather ignorant of the ways of our sister organization.

 

[LovetoCamp]

No jd, I'm not concerned with anyone targeting me, but I am extremely paranoid about my children and the children who's safety I'm frequently charged with. Big time paranoid. Take a read on some of the priest abuse victims and how it impacted their lives. I wouldn't wish that on anyone, well, maybe you, but no one else. There's got to be a reason that one of the lawyers for a diocese stated that upwards to half of the priests are homosexuals. Why is that? A whole sub-society of supposed chaste priests with a monsterous influence over thse young people in their charge. They violated that sacred trust again and again and again and again, both with young boys and girls. It seems to me that the same catastrophe would occur if homosexuals were given that same level of trust with our young teenage scouts as they have in their parishes. I think only a blindly naive idiot would support letting homosexuals become scout leaders. Anyone who would agree to let their alter boy aged kids go on a week long outing with two homosexual adult leaders, well they're lying. Would you take that risk with your own child? It would be the death knell of Scouting.

[johndaigler]

 

CLAP, CLAP, CLAP, CLAP . . .

 

Trailpounder, at this moment, I AM TREMENDOUSLY PROUD OF YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

YOUR VILE, MINDLESS COMMENTS DISPLAY AN IGNORANCE, FEAR AND HATRED THAT ARE EMBARASSING!! PLEASE, LEAVE ME OUT OF ANY OF YOUR FUTURE THOUGHTS. FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY!!!

 

JD

[LovetoCamp]

Credible to who, you? Like I care. Man you really think you're the cat's meow. Put me on squelch. Maybe then you can save both some bandwidth and save me from reading those 2500 word sleep-inducing posts of meaningless rambling blather. Please.

[Hunt]

If your child is ever sexually molested by an adult, it will most likely be by somebody who is not openly homosexual. So if you're really concerned about it, you should never send your son away with any adults at all. Your child's protection from molestation in Scouting is two-deep leadership and background checks. If that's not good enough, you might want to reconsider having your child participate.

Personally, I would not be concerned about homosexual leaders molesting my child, any more than I'm concerned about my daughter's male soccer coaches molesting her--which means, I'm concerned enough that I think there should always be two adults present.

I do however, think those who don't want their children to be led by openly gay leaders have a legitimate concern if they believe that homosexuality is an immoral lifestyle. I wouldn't want my son's scout leader to be living with a woman out of wedlock, either, for the same reason. But again, this is an argument for local choice on this issue, not national policy.

[boleta]

Hunt- as always, the VOICE of reason. But the voice of reason is lost on the unreasonable.

 

This thread demonstrates why many choose to read but not actively participate in the Forum.

[NJCubScouter]

Very well said, Hunt.

[LovetoCamp]

You can post all the "feel good" politically correct junk you want on this web site, not a one of you would send your son on a 14 day long cruise with two homo leaders. Not a one of you.

[Hunt]

I know several gay men with whom I would trust my son's safety for any length of time, just as I know heterosexual men with whom I would trust my daughter.

However, I probably would not want my son to go on a two-week trip with two gay leaders, because I don't think the gay lifestyle is moral. For the same reason, I would not send my child for two weeks with a man and woman who were cohabiting but unmarried, or with a person who I thought might make bigoted statements in the presence of my child. I am able to make a distinction between the risk of sexual predation and negative influences.

[Rooster7]

Hunt,

 

If your child is ever sexually molested by an adult, it will most likely be by somebody who is not openly homosexual.

 

Now why is this? Is it because a self-admitted homosexual is so consumed by his moral principles, and so well disciplined, that taking advantage of a young boy is prohibited from his thinking? Or is it because most people are wise enough to take measures to prohibit circumstances whereas a young boy would be left alone with a self-admitted homosexual?

 

So if you're really concerned about it, you should never send your son away with any adults at all. Your child's protection from molestation in Scouting is two-deep leadership and background checks. If that's not good enough, you might want to reconsider having your child participate.

 

Yes. We all should be cautious when we send our children away with other adults. Certainly, the concept of two-deep leadership is a good one. However, I still need to examine closely - exactly who and why it is that I allow others to lead my child. I study their behavior well. I make discreet inquiries. I pray about it. As God leads, I place my trust in others. If I come to the conclusion that someone has questionable morals and/or behavior, partnering that person up with another adult that fits the same description, is not going to alleviate my concern. In fact, no matter who the second person may be, I am not going to feel comfortable if the other adult is someone I cannot trust. So while two-deep leadership is a good concept, its not a catchall and wed be wise as parents to keep that in mind.

 

Personally, I would not be concerned about homosexual leaders molesting my child, any more than I'm concerned about my daughter's male soccer coaches molesting her--which means, I'm concerned enough that I think there should always be two adults present.

 

Still you want to be able to trust both adults. If you suspect that one of the two has an unhealthy interest in your daughter - while the second adult provides some level of protection, it doesnt exactly make you feel good about the situation. And if the second adult meets the description of the first, it will make the situation even worse, by a factor of ten. Put any two men together that are tempted by the same sin and what do you think the result will be?

 

Boleta,

 

Hunt- as always, the VOICE of reason. But the voice of reason is lost on the unreasonable.

 

In other words, those who dont agree are fools? I dont begrudge you for having that opinion. When it comes to this issue and many others like it there are two very distinct sides. And there is absolutely a side to all of these arguments which one might label as unreasonable or foolish. It comes down to what truth has penetrated your heart. So, while you may view me as someone who blindly follows religious teachings (if it makes you feel better call them false teachings). I see myself as convicted by God to follow His will and you as someone who cannot see or denies His truths. I cannot be angry with you if you fail to see what I see. And even if youre just being stubborn, my anger is not righteous. I dont make my posts as pretence to express my anger...or at least I hope not. They simply represent my beliefs.

 

This thread demonstrates why many choose to read but not actively participate in the Forum.

 

Boleta, I have more respect for you (although I dont agree with your thoughts) than I would with anyone that would refrain from an issues and politics forum simply because the debate is heavily divided and heated. Passion is near the root of all things worth fighting for and it was the catalyst for the BSA. If youre empathetic about God, Country and Family, you have no business being an adult leader in the BSA. So, while I am more than happy to reach out with a firm hand and a warm smile to anyone who likes to discuss issues and politics, I will not apologize for defending my beliefs passionately.

 

With 55% voter turn out being a high water mark for presidential elections over the last 36 years or so, I would suggest that passion is what this country has been sorely lacking for quite some time. I am convinced - if more people engaged in debate, particularly heated debate, theyd eventually discover a common link to their beliefs. They would better understand why they embrace certain beliefs. And once youve done that its hard not to be passionate about even the smallest issues.