packsaddle Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 OK, I'd like to know where I can see one of those Gay Atheist Baby Seals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiLo Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 It's saddening to me to see so many posts expressing the short term view "We can't allow gays in because we would lose members and/or leaders". It would be so much nicer if people had the courage to discuss the ethics of banning gay folk, and perhaps the longer term situation as societal attitudes continue to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 HiLo, That has been discussed here before. The thread's originator asked not to discuss whether homosexuals should be admitted on philosophical grounds but rather to answer the question of what would the likely effect of admitting homosexuals. The posters have amazingly stuck to the original thread rather well - not a common occurrence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortridge Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 While I support opening up the program, I'm still wrestling with the logistical issue of tenting. It's making my head spin around in circles, honestly. In Venturing, we segregate young men and women based on the potential for inappropriate contact or conduct, an open acknowledgement that such behavior could take place. That's just a realistic approach. Do we do the same for openly gay youth in a "new" Scouting program, and why or why not? We couldn't really put gay youth with gay youth - that would be like putting a straight boy with a straight girl ... whether or not there's any attraction there, it sets up the potential for inappropriate activities. Would we put gay youth with straight youth, because nothing's going to happen there? Do we have everyone sleep in one-person tents? Youth of all genders and sexual orientations are going to quickly recognize the hypocrisy if the program does not change in that respect, and they're going to quickly lose respect for the program. Why do Jane and Jack have to sleep apart when John and James don't? Really, that doesn't make much logical sense, and we all know that teenagers especially are focused on logic and have very strong feelings about fairness. They're going to call BS, and loudly. And don't forget that Venturing itself would be undergoing a similar transition. Opening it up to lesbian youth, not just gays, would create tenting/lodging issues on that side, as well. So how do we do it? Do we put everyone in one-person tents? Do we put gay and lesbian youth in one-person tents, while separating straight girls and straight guys? Do we develop honest, open training programs to help adult leaders deal with issues of sexuality and behavior for kids ages 10-18 and 14-21? Do we focus on behavior, and let the youth tent with whomever they like? [slight edit for clarity.](This message has been edited by shortridge) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJCubScouter Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Shortridge, I don't think you need to have your head spinning. And as I've said a couple of times, I don't think a national rule is needed on this subject. I think local leadership can deal with the different situations that arise as a matter of common sense. My personal common sense would say that in the very rare event that you have two or more openly gay youth members in the same troop, it would probably be a good idea for them not to share a tent. I also think the issue would come up so very infrequently, if it ever came up at all, that very few (if any) leaders would really have to figure out how to deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 NJScouter, By your logic, there should be absolutely no issue with a heterosexual male and a homosexual female tenting together. Similarly, there is absolutely no issue with a heterosexual female and a homosexual male tenting together. I do not think that most would find that tenting arrangement acceptable. Therefore, one should not allow a heterosexual male and a homosexual male to tent together and a homosexual female and a heterosexual female tenting together. So only single person tents should ever be allowed. Also, if these local options are enacted, there will be troops that allow only Jews, only Christians, only whites, only blacks, only hispanics, et cetera. I believe that the BSA is acting in a prudent and responsible manner in order to deliver a program that proclaims to be morally straight which according to most (though not all) religious denominations would preclude accepting homosexual behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GernBlansten Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Vol, If there was a local option, I don't see why it wouldn't transcend race or creed. This would allow freedom of the unit to decide who they want. It would also come with a price. If a unit wanted to ban Jews, a local option would allow it. They would however be known in their district as the anti-semitic troop. If a unit wanted to ban blacks, a local option would allow it. They would however be known in their district as the racist troop. If a unit wanted to ban gays, a local option would allow it. They would however be known in their district as the homo-phobic troop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Gern, It is interesting that you did not say: If a unit wanted to ban Christians, a local option would allow it. They would however be known in their district as the anti-Christian troop. Also, it is not correct to call people who believe, as most religious denominations do, that homosexuality is wrong homophobic. They are not afraid of homosexuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GernBlansten Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 If they weren't afraid of the homosexual influence in their unit, why would they ban them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Boyce Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 The problem isn't tenting. The problem is defining deviancy down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Gern, From prior comments and leaving out Christians, one wonders if you are anti-Christian? You have implied dislike especially evangelical Christians and their values. Once again, people who believe that homosexuality is sinful may not wish to associate with homosexuals. That is not fear. They may not wish to associate with alcoholics either. I do not agree with that view and I have homosexual friends and colleagues. I am always concerned about issues of abuse of our youth and I am personally torn on this issue. There are many cases of reported sexual abuse in councils all across the country that never reach the press. Those cases are too many. The question that no one can definitively answer is whether a change in policy would change that number (whatever it is - only national knows) either up or down. If the answer is no change or a decrease (I cannot logically see how it could decrease the number of cases but I will include it as a possibility). If the answer is that there would be a statistically significant increase in the number of sexual molestations based upon a policy change to allow homosexuals, then I believe that everyone on this list would want to protect our children rather than make a policy change that affects less than 2% of the adult population (as I have quoted from the CDC before on these lists). So the real question is what is the effect on the number of cases of sexual abuse if the policy of the BSA were to be changed. I can only believe that it would increase but I do not know if the increase would be significant. The only way to know is to do the experiment. Whether it is worth the risk is clearly a matter of opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortridge Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 So the real question is what is the effect on the number of cases of sexual abuse if the policy of the BSA were to be changed. What has been the effect on GSUSA, or in the UK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoutingagain Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 "Also, if these local options are enacted, there will be troops that allow only Jews, only Christians, only whites, only blacks, only hispanics, et cetera. I believe that the BSA is acting in a prudent and responsible manner in order to deliver a program that proclaims to be morally straight which according to most (though not all) religious denominations would preclude accepting homosexual behavior" Just to be clear, the BSA does currently allow discrimination by individual chartered organizations. For example there are Jewish, Muslim and Christian units that require membership in their respective CO's to be members of their BSA unit. Units may also disciminate against female adult leaders if they want. While not explicitly allowing racial descrimination, in many cases this allowable religious descrimination effectively creates racial descrimination. Ironically National allows COs to be more descriminatory than they are, but do not allow individual units to be less. SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packsaddle Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 vol_scouter, In one sentence you mention the desire not to associate with a certain group and then you mention that you are friends with members of that group. I am curious, do you really think the person with whom you profess a desire not associate really considers you to be an actual 'friend'? To me, such rejection is evidence of nothing like friendship. I could never view or treat a friend in that manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vol_scouter Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Packsaddle, They come to me for advice and tell me of very personal issues, so yes I am their friends. What you imply is that you cannot be friends with an alcoholic or an adulterer (I assume that you do not agree with those activities). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts