Why are we talking to the troll?

[slontwovvy]

I do agree with the things said here, but will add that it is through heating that metal becomes stronger. Hopefully it will be the same here.

[MomScouter]

I see a major distinction between the atheist issue and the homosexuality issue:

 

To the best of my knowledge (someone correct me if I am wrong), the Scout Oath and Law have always included references to God and being reverent. Thus as a private organization BSA is within their rights to exclude those who do not profess a belief in a higher power. However, I do believe that this is a form of religious discrimination and because of that the BSA should not expect to use public facilities or receive any kind of government funded perks.

 

In contrast, there is nothing in the Oath, Law, or any handbook, leader guide, or any other publication that I have ever been provided that outlines any guidelines for sexuality. I have always been told that ANY discussions pertaining to sexuality are to be deferred to the parents. I do not for one minute believe that morally straight is a reference to sexuality, but rather a directive to follow values as outlined in the Law.

 

If you have an open mind, please consider the following taken from www.scoutingforall.com:

 

In a letter sent to James Dale, the BSA said that they had expelled him because he did not adhere to "the standards of leadership established by the [bSA], which specifically forbid membership to homosexuals." But where is this anti-gay "policy"? It is found nowhere in official BSA publications. Even the Supreme Court justices remarked that "It remained, in effect, a secret Boy Scout policy" and this policy ". . . appears to be no more than a private statement of a few BSA executives . . ." In fact, the BSA states officially that "[n]either the charter nor the laws of the [bSA] permits the exclusion of any boy... " . . . our membership shall be representative of all the population in every community, district, and council."

 

Although the BSA has clearly stated that sexual matters are "not construed to be Scouting's proper area," they have also stated that they "teach young boys who are Scouts that homosexuality is immoral." Even though some people in Scouting believe this, especially some religious groups that charter troops, many other religious groups do not adhere to this belief and, in fact, believe to the contrary that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong." The BSA bylaws state that the BSA is "absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward religious training" and in fact it " does not define what constitutes duty to God or the practice of religion." Yet,despite the BSA's denials that it addresses sexual matters or that it espouses a articular religious doctrine, the BSA has condemned homosexual identity, the specific moral doctrine of only some of its religious supporters! We are afraid that the Boy Scouts of America is being taken over by the relgious fundamentalists who use the Scout Law and Scout Oath as weapons of hatred,

discrimination, and bigotry to hurt people who are gay in the same way they use the bible, Jesus Christ and God to hurt gay youth and adults. This type if behavior is what is immoral.

 

The BSA bases its exclusion of gays on the Scouts Laws that a Scout is clean, and morally straight. But the Boy Scout Handbook itself says the following about cleanliness:

 

"Swear words, profanity, and dirty stories are weapons that ridicule other people and hurt their feelings. The same is true of racial slurs and jokes making fun of ethnic groups or people with physical or mental limitations. A Scouts knows there is no kindness or honor in such mean-spirited behavior. He avoids it in his own words and deeds. He defends those who are targets of insults."

 

About "morally straight," the Handbook also says, "To be a person of strong character, guide your life with honesty, purity, and justice. Respect and defend the rights of all people." Clearly, it seems to us that a gay person who is being "honest" about who he is and who strives for justice is "morally straight," and that the non-gay who defends his rights is also "morally straight." Regarding this Law, the Scoutmaster Handbook says, "A boy's courage to do what his head and his heart tell him is right," is moral fitness.

 

In response to Rooster7s comment Your statement infers that there may be a significantly large enough contingent to evoke these changes. I don't buy it. By the way, I'm fairly certain that most of these councils are from the San Francisco and New York area. Councils who have challenged the policy do include San Francisco and New York, but they also include Chicago, Boston, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles , as well as many others and individual units. Check out the scoutingforall site for more info.

 

Finally, in regards to Girls Scouts: I have been involved in Girl Scouts many more years than Boy Scouts. I have no desire to know the sexual orientation of any leader or girl. It is none of my business. GSUSA agrees. I have never known of any problems because of this. GSUSA is very diligent in doing background checks to screen out child molesters but sexual orientation of leaders or girls is simply a nonissue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sctmom]

Welcome Mom Scouter.

You can come sit next to me, yes that would be the chairs on the left side of the room.

hehehehehe

 

May I please recommend that everyone take the time this weekend to review the Boy Scout handbook about the Scout Oath and Law. I found it very helpful to look at what we are teaching our boys --- respect and defend the religious beliefs of others even if you disagree. This is repeated more than once.

 

Now can we go talk about the new merit badge requirements and all those new Webelos crossing over this month?

 

[Rooster7]

ScouterMom

 

"To the best of my knowledge (someone correct me if I am wrong), the Scout Oath and Law have always included references to God and being reverent. Thus as a private organization BSA is within their rights to exclude those who do not profess a belief in a higher power."

 

BSA as a private organization is free to interpret its own policies. It does not have to spell out every belief or inference of its policies. In fact, they are free to change their policies to be more restrictive or less at any time they so chose. The Scout Oath and Law were not written to be legally binding documents. They were written to re-enforce the values of BSA, but not the values that you apparently subscribe to.

 

"However, I do believe that this is a form of religious discrimination and because of that the BSA should not expect to use public facilities or receive any kind of government funded perks."

 

Fortunately, Many if not most do not agree with your definition of religious discrimination.

 

"In contrast, there is nothing in the Oath, Law, or any handbook, leader guide, or any other publication that I have ever been provided that outlines any guidelines for sexuality. I have always been told that ANY discussions pertaining to sexuality are to be deferred to the parents. I do not for one minute believe that 'morally straight' is a reference to sexuality, but rather a directive to follow values as outlined in the Law."

 

"Morally straight" is obviously not referring specifically to sexuality. However, most in BSA would subscribe to the idea that homosexuality is immoral. Its BSA's free right to agree and to deny membership to homosexuals. This does not have to be printed in black and white as you contend.

 

If you have an open mind, please consider the following taken from www. Scoutingforall. com:

 

Nice. And if I don't want to consider the same ridiculous arguments that I've heard time and time againI suppose that would make me close minded. By the way, "Scouting for All" is a catchy name. Ironically, if they achieve their goal, it will be at the expense of millions of God loving members. I guess these folks don't count.

 

'In a letter sent to James Dale, the BSA said that they had expelled him because he did not adhere to "the standards of leadership established by the [bSA], which specifically forbid membership to homosexuals." But where is this anti-gay "policy"? It is found nowhere in official BSA publications.'

 

Again, BSA is not legally bound by its reference material. Not that the material is inconsistent. The simple fact is, the homosexual issue is not addressed in its reference material. So What? They still have the right to deem the behavior morally unacceptable and to deny membership to homosexuals.

 

"Even the Supreme Court justices remarked that "It remained, in effect, a secret Boy Scout policy" and this policy ". . . appears to be no more than a private statement of a few BSA executives . . ."

 

And yet, they also sided with BSA and agreed that they have a right to deny membership to homosexuals. Why? Because they are a private organization and they have a right to establish their own standards (written or unwritten) and associate with those people that they so chose.

 

In fact, the BSA states officially that "[n]either the charter nor the laws of the [bSA] permits the exclusion of any boy... " . . . our membership shall be representative of all the population in every community, district, and council."

 

Hmmm. Does that mean BSA should allow pedophiles into the organization too? How about "animal lovers"? How does one draw the distinction? Obviously, you can't. Bottom line is - Without God; morality is subjective. Regardless, it is BSA's legal right to be the arbitrator of that subjectivity and determine what they are willing to accept or not accept. Why can't you accept that? This goes to the very core of this society's freedom. It's the same concept that allows GSUSA to be the organization it presents itself to be.

 

Although the BSA has clearly stated that sexual matters are "not construed to be Scouting's proper area," they have also stated that they "teach young boys who are Scouts that homosexuality is immoral." Even though some people in Scouting believe this, especially some religious groups that charter troops, many other religious groups do not adhere to this belief and, in fact, believe to the contrary " that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong." The BSA bylaws state that the BSA is "absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward religious training" and in fact it " does not define what constitutes duty to God or the practice of religion." Yet,despite the BSA's denials that it addresses sexual matters or that it espouses a articular religious doctrine, the BSA has condemned homosexual identity, the specific moral doctrine of only some of its religious supporters!

 

By this logic, BSA cannot condemn any sexually immoral behavior. Given this pretence, BSA could not say sex with a child or an animal is immoral. Why do we believe these things are wrong? After all, who can say when a man or woman truly becomes a man or a woman? Who can speak for the animal? These are all inane and insane arguments that have been made before. It's the same kind of argument that homosexuals make. They aren't hurting anyone, right? It's an affront to God. It's immoral. Thankfully, BSA still has the right to feel this way. If you don't, then you have a right to start your own group.

 

We are afraid that the Boy Scouts of America is being taken over by the religious fundamentalists who use the Scout Law and Scout Oath as weapons of hatred, discrimination, and bigotry to hurt people who are gay in the same way they use the bible, Jesus Christ and God to hurt gay youth and adults. This type of behavior is what is immoral.

 

Funny, I feel the same way about folks who twist God's word. You brought the bible into this. Do you honestly believe that the God of the bible would shake his head in agreement with this sentiment? God is very loving, but he is also righteous. The bible speaks as much, if not more, about his righteousness as it does about his love. Many find comfort with the idea that God will accept anything. This permits them to do as they please without concern. Do you truly believe that these statements are inspired by God's love? Perhaps, they merely allow these folks to sleep well.

 

In response to Rooster7's comment 'Your statement infers that there may be a significantly large enough contingent to evoke these changes. I don't buy it. By the way, I'm fairly certain that most of these councils are from the San Francisco and New York area.' Councils who have challenged the 'policy' do include San Francisco and New York, but they also include Chicago, Boston, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles , as well as many others and individual units. Check out the scoutingforall site for more info.

 

Okay, so you can name a few cities, and perhaps a few dozen councils. Regardless, I'm still banking that there are more of us that them. You may feel that you're defending some noble cause. I don't know your motivation. I don't condemn people who do not believe as I do. If you're a Christian, I urge you to read your bible. When you do, you "keep an open mind". God's love is great, but so is his righteousness.

 

Finally, in regards to Girls Scouts: I have been involved in Girl Scouts many more years than Boy Scouts. I have no desire to know the sexual orientation of any leader or girl. It is none of my business.

 

I have no "desire" to know the sexual habits of anyone, unless it has the potential to harm people I care about. Such is the case for BSA's policy. Homosexuality (among other deviations) has the potential to harm my son directly (by unwanted contact) and/or indirectly (by corrupting his moral beliefs).

 

GSUSA agrees. I have never known of any problems because of this. GSUSA is very diligent in doing background checks to screen out child molesters but sexual orientation of leaders or girls is simply a non-issue.

 

Good for them. It's their choice as a private organization. It's my choice to decide whether or not to join them. I chose not to join them. I hope those "open minded" folks who disagree with BSA will follow the example of a free society, and allow BSA to be the organization it wants to be.

 

 

[andrews]

Girl Scouts can be as squishy as they want to be.

 

But it is also false to try and separate private actions from public ones. They all come out and affect what is being taught to my sons.

 

However, I do believe that this is a form of religious discrimination and because of that the BSA should not expect to use public facilities or receive any kind of government funded perks.

 

This is definitely not accurate. The First Ammendment guarantees the free exercise of religion, and only limits the government's establishment of it. The free exercise part means religious citizens are just as free to use "public" facilities as those who have no convictions at all.

 

And I can think you are foolish, but still defend your right to be such. What riles me up is when you start demanding that I not even say you are foolish in your beliefs, or face living my life out of the public merely because I believe the Bible, and take it seriously. (Not a false reading of "love" that endangers people because it condones sin.)

 

Brad

[Rooster7]

My previous post should have been addressed to MomScouter (vice ScouterMom). What can I say? My apologies to MomScouterI'm a little dyslexic.

[Dedicated Dad]

there is nothing in the Oath, Law, that outlines any guidelines for sexualityI do not for one minute believe that morally straight is a reference to sexuality Youre right, theres nothing that outlines incest, bestiality, debauchery or necrophilia either, one boys sexuality is as good as another if its not in the guidelines, right? During that thoughtful minute you took to weigh the virtues of morally straight, did you think any of these mentioned iniquities as not being referenced as morally straight either? If you have an open mindTheres having an open mind to things good, right and true and theres having an open mind to depravity, filth and degradation. Im not sure that its an open mind you want us to have. But where is this anti-gay "policy"? It is found nowhere in official BSA publications. Neither is the anti-incest policy, where is that one? Even the Supreme Court justices remarked that "It remained, in effect, a secret Boy Scout policy" Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer dont make up the entire SCOTUS. many other religious groups do not adhere to this belief and, in fact, believe to the contrary that discrimination against homosexuals is wrong." Its not necessarily a religious issue, its a right and wrong issue and discrimination is not always a bad thing. To discriminate means to distinguish, and here the BSA is distinguishing between right and wrong, and this is a good thing. Yet,despite the BSA's denials that it addresses sexual matters or that it espouses a articular religious doctrineWrong, wrong, wrong. Where does the BSA mention that the practice of perversion is religiously wrong? It doesnt, period! the BSA has condemned homosexual identityAgain you are wrong, you really need to research before start making things up. Here is what the BSA said only yesterday after they reaffirmed their position: 9. WHEREAS, the Boy Scouts of America respects the right of persons and individuals to hold values and standards different than the Boy Scouts of America, the national officers also agree that the Boy Scouts of America is entitled to expect that persons and organizations with different values and standards will nevertheless respect those of the Boy Scouts of America. Where is the condemnation? Your motives are becoming increasingly apparent. the specific moral doctrineWhat? Show me where they have written a term of art like this? Theres no doctrine, its called morality, and you dont need religion to know right from wrong. We are afraid that the Boy Scouts of America is being taken over by the relgious fundamentalists who use the Scout Law and Scout Oath as weapons of hatred,

discrimination, and bigotry to hurt people who are gay in the same way they use the bible, Jesus Christ and God to hurt gay youth and adults. This little specious diatribe is probably off the scoutingforall website, isnt it? Firstly, to say that the BSA uses hatered of any kind is beyond comment, how dare you, have you no shame? And further, to use the word bigotry is intellectually meaningless, bigotry can only be against the innate conditions of race, gender, religion or political affiliation, not chosen behavior. You get an F for that little inaccuracy. A Scouts knows there is no kindness or honor in such mean-spirited behavior. Distinguishing between right and wrong is not mean-spirited, your little talking points are falling apart. Clearly, it seems to us that a gay person who is being "honest" about who he is Hehehe, wow this little talking point is right out of the pro-perversion agenda. Its NOT what they are, its what they DO, you aint born that way MOM, but youre welcome to try and prove it! "A boy's courage to do what his head and his heart tell him is right," is moral fitness. I thought you said they were born that way? but sexual orientation of leaders or girls is simply a nonissue. Yep, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.

 

 

 

[MomScouter]

Rooster7,

 

When you refer to BSA and they who do you mean? I am in BSA as well as all the executives who make policy. If they do not spell out policy changes made more or less restrictive anytime they choose then how can they expect us grass roots people to follow them? There is a danger of policy being made at the whim of whoever is in the upper ranks, with no kind of open process whatsoever.

 

most in BSA would subscribe to the idea that homosexuality is immoral. Its BSA's free right to agree and to deny membership to homosexuals. This does not have to be printed in black and white as you contend.

 

How can you possibly know what most in BSA subscribe to or feel is immoral?

 

Does that mean BSA should allow pedophiles into the organization too?

 

Homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia. In fact, most pedophiles live a straight lifestyle. Of course known pedophiles should not be allowed in the organization there is Youth Protection Training to prevent this and protect the boys. Homosexuals are no more inclined to molest boys in the troop than women leaders.

 

it is BSA's legal right to be the arbitrator of that subjectivity and determine what they are willing to accept or not accept. Why can't you accept that?

 

I do accept that to a certain degree, but I am not willing to blindly accept policies made by a handful of people at the top who choose not to communicate what basis upon the policy is made, nor the specifics of the policy and how it is to be executed.

 

 

Funny, I feel the same way about folks who twist God's word. You brought the bible into this. Do you honestly believe that the God of the bible would shake his head in agreement with this sentiment?

 

Rooster, my God (my personal beliefs which I do not impose on anyone) tells me there are different paths to Truth. My God wants his children to love and respect one another above all else.

 

Okay, so you can name a few cities, and perhaps a few dozen councils. Regardless, I'm still banking that there are more of us that them. You may feel that you're defending some noble cause. I don't know your motivation. I don't condemn people who do not believe as I do. If you're a Christian, I urge you to read your bible. When you do, you "keep an open mind". God's love is great, but so is his righteousness

 

These few cities are large cities wouldnt you say? This is not just a handful of people. My motivation is to provide a good program to all boys who choose to be in it and not let a vague policy prevent them from participating. As for my religion, suffice it to say that it is one that advises me to listen to God within my own heart.

 

'Homosexuality (among other deviations) has the potential to harm my son directly (by unwanted contact) and/or indirectly (by corrupting his moral beliefs).'

 

Rooster, no one in Scouts should be promoting any kind of sexual agenda. A scouters or scouts sexual orientation is no ones business and should not come up anywhere in the program. A homosexual leader can no more corrupt your sons moral beliefs than a hetero leader; it is simply not a topic for discussion in the program.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[sctmom]

I find it very ironic to hear some speak of "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" when they themselves are guilty of this.

 

Mom Scouter, Let me tell you I agree with you 100%, but you are wasting your time talking to deaf ears. You will soon be banished to the corner with me and therefore be ignored no matter what you try to discuss. Also, you will soon find out that some people do not believe you can do certain things within BSA because you are female. Don't give up. We have to do what is best for OUR sons, and raise them according OUR beliefs.

 

Thank you for the link to ScoutingForAll.

 

I also wondered how anyone can say "most members of BSA" are against atheists and homosexuality. Was there a poll I missed? I will gladly stand up and be counted for my beliefs, as I'm sure many on this board will be. As for the bulk of BSA (and our society), most don't think about it, and will not stand up and be counted one way or another.

 

Happy Scouting! And have a good weekend! I'm going Scouting for Food!

 

[MomScouter]

DD,

 

The promotion of ANY sexual agenda is outside the boundaries of the scouting program. A persons individual sexual orientation is their own business, not that of BSA.

 

And yes, DD, the quote I posted was from scoutingforall.com, as I stated. It was not my statement (although I do agree with a lot of it) , maybe you should go there and direct your condescending remarks to them.

 

I thought you said they were born that way? Did I?

 

I have no desire to argue with you the point of whether homosexuality is moral or immoral. You are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.

 

Methinks this topic is going to be around for a loooong while in BSA. It will be interesting how my grandchildren will see the outcome.

 

[MomScouter]

Sctmom,

 

I expected to get slammed by a few of the posters here but I think debate is a good thing. I know my views are not popular with a lot of BSA members and I do put most of my energy into trying to make my son's program better, not getting on a soapbox! But I am not afraid to say what I believe.

 

In our council we have a lot of respected women leaders, in fact, our council president is a woman. We also have units where adult male leaders refuse to go on campouts if women are present.

 

Have a good Scouting for Food weekend! We do ours next month, we're getting ready for Klondike Derby now.

[Chippewa29]

sctmom-

 

As you and the others probably haven't noticed, I do not post on these issues, although I do read them on a regular basis. If you would, please email me at chippewa29vigil@yahoo.com as I would like to get some feedback from you on a few things you have posted as well as get your perspectives on some issues I have regarding being a female Scouter. I hope to hear from you soon.

[Rooster7]

When you refer to BSA and 'they' who do you mean? I am in BSA as well as all the executives who 'make policy'. If 'they' do not spell out policy changes made 'more or less restrictive anytime they choose' then how can 'they' expect us grass roots people to follow them? There is a danger of policy being made at the whim of whoever is in the upper ranks, with no kind of open process whatsoever.

 

You missed the point. I don't believe BSA does change the policies willy-nilly. The point is - BSA can legally promote the values it so chooses. You seem to think that they are bound by "your interpretation" of the Scout Oath and some other Scout reference material.

 

'most in BSA would subscribe to the idea that homosexuality is immoral. Its BSA's free right to agree and to deny membership to homosexuals. This does not have to be printed in black and white as you contend. 'How can you possibly know what most in BSA subscribe to or feel is immoral?

 

It's just my opinion based on many years of being around Scouts and Scouters. I could be wrong. I pray I am not.

 

'Does that mean BSA should allow pedophiles into the organization too? ' Homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia.

 

Missed the point again. You claim that BSA does not have the right to look at sexual behavior. Pedophilia and a large number of others deviations (such as those listed by DD) are examples of sexual behavior that BSA and others should be concerned about. Homosexuality, in my opinion, fits in with the rest of them. It's flat out wrong.

 

In fact, most pedophiles live a 'straight' lifestyle. Of course known pedophiles should not be allowed in the organization - there is Youth Protection Training to prevent this and protect the boys.

 

MomScouter, please do a little research here. If you contend that there more heterosexual pedophiles that homosexual, then certainly you are correct. Considering the heterosexual population outnumbers the homosexual population by about 20 to 1, this should be no surprise to anyone. Now, let's do a fair comparison. It's not even close. From the studies I have read, over half the homosexual population has had sex with a minor. They prey on our youth.

 

Homosexuals are no more inclined to molest boys in the troop than women leaders.

 

This last comment is simply not within the bounds of reality. I don't believe that you believe this statement. Repeat it all you want, but it's silly

 

'it is BSA's legal right to be the arbitrator of that subjectivity and determine what they are willing to accept or not accept. Why can't you accept that? ' I do accept that to a certain degree, but I am not willing to blindly accept policies made by a handful of people at the top who choose not to communicate what basis upon the policy is made, nor the specifics of the policy and how it is to be executed.

 

I think those "handful of people at the top" represent most of BSA pretty well. Just look at most of the posts on these boards. Do they reflect a grass roots effort to change that policy or maintain it? I would be shocked to hear anyone express your views around a Scouters campfire. If you chose to do so, don't be surprised if you encounter a strong negative reaction.

 

'Funny, I feel the same way about folks who twist God's word. You brought the bible into this. Do you honestly believe that the God of the bible would shake his head in agreement with this sentiment? ' Rooster, my God (my personal beliefs which I do not impose on anyone) tells me there are different paths to Truth. My God wants his children to love and respect one another above all else.

 

Well, first God doesn't belong to one person. He is our God (not my God) whether you like it or not. Second, I can love homosexuals as much as another flawed being (as we all are). This is not about my willingness (or your willingness) to love others. It's about accepting God's word and condemning sin when we see it.

 

These few cities are large cities wouldn't you say? This is not just a handful of people. My motivation is to provide a good program to all boys who choose to be in it and not let a vague policy prevent them from participating. As for my religion, suffice it to say that it is one that advises me to listen to God within my own heart.

 

Again, I could be wrong. Perhaps I am in the minority. Regardless, numbers will not change what is right. It may change BSA policy one day. It won't change God's word. As to you listening to your heart, how is it that so many others differ with your heart? For the sake of argument, say the country and/or BSA is split down the middle, each side listening to their heart. So, does that mean your GodI mean our God will be please with us both? One of us is wrong. I suggest reading the bible (and more than a few select verses), pray about it, and then listen - but not to your heart, but God.

 

'Homosexuality (among other deviations) has the potential to harm my son directly (by unwanted contact) and/or indirectly (by corrupting his moral beliefs).' Rooster, no one in Scouts should be promoting any kind of sexual agenda. A Scouter's or scout's sexual orientation is no ones business and should not come up anywhere in the program. A homosexual leader can no more corrupt your son's moral beliefs than a hetero leader; it is simply not a topic for discussion in the program.

 

Well, I guess we disagree again. Homosexuality is wrong. Accepting one as a leader would be endorsing the behavior. Like any other sin or vice, if one renounces the behavior, I am open to that person. Otherwise, we have no common ground. Furthermore, I know men (I am one after all)I agree we're not all intent on evil. In fact, I admire a great number of men. Nevertheless, I wouldn't trust an avowed homosexual man with my son for one minute. Well, lets be reasonableI wouldn't trust an avowed homosexual woman with my daughter either.

 

sctmom,

 

If you don't want to join the debate, fine. But please do not proclaim yourself to be a victim. I'm willing to listen to you just like MomScouter. If I weren't, I wouldn't be spending this much time writing out these thoughts.

 

[Dedicated Dad]

I find it very ironic to hear some speak of "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" when they themselves are guilty of this. Well since Im the only one who said this Ill assume you meant me Mom. Perhaps you should expand on the where the irony begins and ends here because youre kinda coming off just a smidge misanthropic. PS, nice to see you back from your self-imposed exile, I was hoping your illness wouldnt keep you away. will soon be banished to the corner with [me] and therefore be ignored no matter what you try to discuss. Not true Mom, youve never been banished nor ignored, youve endeared yourself to all of us and youd surely be missed if you werent here.

[Dedicated Dad]

 

The promotion of ANY sexual agenda is outside the boundaries of the scouting program. Granted, and that is the presumption of normal man/woman relationships, NOT the practice of perversion. > A persons individual sexual orientation is their own business, not that of BSA. NOT when said persons make it known it is outside of a normal man/woman relationship. And yes, DD, the quote I posted was from scoutingforall.com, as I stated. It was not my statement (although I do agree with a lot of it), maybe you should go there and direct your condescending remarks to them. Why should I go there, you agree with and posted the quote here. Either you stand behind it or not, you shouldnt be a shill for them if youre not willing to defend their rhetoric. I have no desire to argue with you the point of whether homosexuality is moral or immoral. You are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine. Yep, morality is opinion huh? I guess if everyone had their own opinion of morality then there really isnt ANY morality, only opinion. Morally Straight means what then?