What would have to change if gays were allowed in?

[GernBlansten]

Did that occur in England?

[skeptic]

From my eavesdropping on kids in schools and on overnights, it has been apparent to me that the very large majority of boys are still VERY uncomfortable with the idea of being gay, or being around them. Their responses are generally to avoid, but occasionally overt physical responses that are added problems. They often can talk about fairness and acceptance, but when actually confronted they react the opposite. And this would also be the case with many parents who give vocal support for acceptance in BSA, but would NEVER allow their son to be involved should it become a reality. Much of this is due to issues that GaHillBilly points out.

 

This simply is reality when a very large majority of people are not open to a certain idea or style of living. They can verbally be accepting, even treat people with respect as long as it does not seem to actually become a personal thing. Once it does become personal in some manner, they will react far differently.

 

So, we would likely see BSA fairly quickly be decimated. I realize there are a few on these boards that will NEVER face these realities, as to them, everyone should have the right to do whatever they want, no matter how if effects the large majority.

 

Just observations and opinion.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

skeptic writes:

realize there are a few on these boards that will NEVER face these realities, as to them, everyone should have the right to do whatever they want, no matter how if effects the large majority.

 

If someone is attempting to exercise what truly is a "right," then of course they can do it, no matter how it affects the large majority. Some people think rights should be ignorable if too many people find a particular one annoying, but not me.

[skeptic]

Merlyn;

 

You are correct; they do have the "right". But it is no longer a "right" when it infringes directly on someone else. So, exercise your rights anywhere you want, as long as they do not try to trump others.

[Eagle92]

Upon reflecting about the Exploring/Venturing split, I remember 1 exploring unit, and heard of others, that maintained their specialty, i.e. police, SAR, etc, but switched from a public entity being the CO to a private entity in order to become Venturing Crews and not have to accept gays. There was a lot of concern by everyone involved.(This message has been edited by eagle92)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

skeptic writes:

You are correct; they do have the "right". But it is no longer a "right" when it infringes directly on someone else.

 

Only if it conflicts with another genuine right (in which case the courts generally determine which right has right-of-way). However, judging by what you've written in the past, your definition of "infringement" appears to be "slightly bothers someone," which isn't infringing someone else's rights. There's no "right" not to be bothered or annoyed per se.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Eagle92 writes:

Upon reflecting about the Exploring/Venturing split, I remember 1 exploring unit, and heard of others, that maintained their specialty, i.e. police, SAR, etc, but switched from a public entity being the CO to a private entity in order to become Venturing Crews and not have to accept gays. There was a lot of concern by everyone involved.

 

Concern over what?

[Pint]

When Scouting in the UK first started going co-ed at all levels, it was up to each individual SCout group to decide weather or not to allow girls to join, some groups said yes, and openly recruited girls to join in with the boys. Some groups said no, and remained a boys only single sex Scout group ( upto 2007 when UK Scout HQ said everyone must acept girls) some groups sat on the fence and said nothing, and did nothing to openly recruit girls.

Maybe a solution for the BSA would be to let each group, or chartering organisation decide.

[GernBlansten]

Thank you Pint.

I'd rather hear from those who actually went through the Rubicon than to put too much credence in those who speculate.

 

So Pint, did the dropping of the gay ban help or hurt scouting in England?

[shortridge]

More to the point - how does UK Scouting handle camping and tenting?

 

That's the only logistical issue that I see with regard to opening the program up here in the States.

[Eagle92]

M L,

Gays molesting members. Grant you female leaders can also molest members, but that wasn't the concern.

 

And let's not forget that there is a precedent with homosexuals creating a unit in order to gain access to youth. That happened in the 1970s in New Orleans. When it became knownwas around the time my brothers got out of Scouting. When I did get involved in scouting a decade later, my mother always asked what was going on, etc. She never told me her reason why she "nagged" me about the trips until I did a paper on the topic in college. That's when I found out that a NAMBLA (sp)group created a troop specifically for molesting youth, and did in fact molest a number of them. When I asked my mom about this, she said yes she knew, and that was why she always asked me what was going on.(This message has been edited by eagle92)(This message has been edited by eagle92)

[Pint]

"So Pint, did the dropping of the gay ban help or hurt scouting in England?"

 

from my point of view, it made no difference what so ever, if anything it just removed something for the media and various presure groups to attack Scouting with.

From what ive read about the 'issues' and the BSA most issues seem to centre round the three G's

Gays,Girls and God.

The first two have been dealt with, and the God issue ( in my opinion) is a bit of a fudge, dealt with by this line from the UK Scout associations equal opportunities policy "Note: With reference to religious belief, the avowed absence of religious belief is a bar to appointment to a Leadership position" although the God issue is a different subject altogether.

 

If your interested the Rules and regulations for UK Scout Association (Known as Policy Organisation and Rules ) are available in the link below:

http://www.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/71

 

 

[GernBlansten]

So did UK Scouting increase or decrease due to dropping of the ban?

[Shriscov]

I would guess that lifting of the ban would be rolled in over time and differently place to place. Scout became integrated racially over time--my reading is from the 1950's through the 1970's.

I would also like to point out that many youth are more accepting of homosexuals than previous generations. My local high school has a Gay/Lesbian/Straight alliance (this is Kansas btw) and certain areas, charter organizations, units and leaders would have few qualms about a more open membership.

[GaHillBilly]

Some are comparing letting girls into BSA, with letting gays in. It's not the same

 

Most parents -- even in California -- don't want their children having sex on camping trips. Period. Granted, there are exceptions to everything, but I seriously doubt that you could build a BSA, or anything like it with the exceptions.

 

If you let girls in, it's easy to put the girls in tents over there, and the guys in tents over here, and the leaders in between. Granted, there could be sneaking around, but it would require that a tent-full of girls and another one of guys agree, and keep the secret. And, even then, it would be highly consensual. Not desirable, but consensual nonetheless.

 

Let gays in, and the possibility of segregating guys and girls goes out the window.

 

You can't put the gays with gays, because that's like putting guys and girls together. You can't put gays with straight guys, because that's like putting horn-dogs with virgins. You can't put gays with girls because some gays are 'bi' and besides the parents wouldn't put up with it.

 

So you're back to 'one-scout, one-tent', or a BSA that just does 'virtual camping'.

 

Of course, that's probably ideal, given some of goals of 'urban Scouts'!

 

GaHillBilly