Petition to the BSA

[Vort]

There's no need to apologize for not wanting to sign the petition.

Here is one thing I could not agree with more than I do.

[MarginOfError]

My second son just received his Eagle Scout award at his court of honor last night. He and his younger brother sold flag subscriptions last week, where at least one person had no compunctions about telling them off because of how "homophobic" the program is.

The use alone of that false, dishonest term prods me to support the BSA in actively preventing homosexuals from holding Scouting positions.

There are two things that strike me about the exchange you describe.

First, person who told them off was acting stupid. People who oppose the BSA solely on one aspect of the program they consider to be a flaw need to recognize that a single policy does not define the complete program*.

Second, the attitude that someone accused the BSA of being homophobic, so we should deliberately act in a manner that vindicates their response is an equally stupid attitude. Once again, we've gone back to highlighting our disagreements, not our commonalities.

But, it's been pretty apparent for a long time that there's plenty of stupid going around on both sides of this debate.

* Very often, in practice, sexual orientation isn't an issue at the unit level. In some councils it isn't much of an issue. At least not until someone goes out of their way to make it an issue.

[Dravin]

Well of course that is a possibility....

The situation I am referring to is a toddler being watched by a gay uncle. The child is older now, but acts homosexual(feminin). If you act a certain way your going to naturally gravitate to a like group of people. In this case he learned feminin traits from his gay uncle, therefore, it is likely he will gravitate to those who already have feminin traits. It is just interesting how he picked it up from his uncle.

Your equation of homosexual with feminine is kinda clouding your point. Is he homosexual or feminine? Those are distinct traits. It's entirely possible to pick up acting feminine just as it's possible to pick up the use of four letter words and calling sandwiches "sammiches", however just because someone picked up feminine traits doesn't mean they picked up being gay any more than a girl picking up tomboyish traits means she picked up being a lesbian.

Edited April 26, 2012 by Dravin

[Tyler90AZ]

I know homosexuality is not contagious... Just know, I know a lot regarding the issue, my brother is gay.

Edited April 26, 2012 by skippy740
Moderator Edit

[rameumptom]

Not contagious, but may have an environmental component. Studies show that many gay/lesbian had sexual encounters with a male when they were young. The girls felt oppressed by the man who touched them, and had a tendency to no longer trust men. The young men felt the man was a father figure and so to be accepted and loved meant to be in a homosexual relationship.

So, we find Olympic diver Greg Louganis' first sexual encounter was with his dive coach. Now, he is gay also. I know men who have gone into prison and end up obtaining "protection" from most of the dangers of prison by being someone's girlfriend. After years of being the woman, the person often will go on in regular life with homosexual proclivities.

Note, I do not believe this is the case in every instance, but it is the case in at least some instances.

[Gwen]

Oddly, in my experience, having a female leader present has been immeasurably beneficial. One anecdote from a couple of years ago:

It was Saturday morning at summer camp and we were packing up and getting ready to go home. We had one boy who was complaining of feeling ill. One of the scoutmasters pulled him aside, asked him all of his symptoms, and then sat him in the shade to rest for a bit. A few minutes later, another scoutmaster talked to him and asked him a similar battery of questions trying to identify the specific illness. After a short discussion, he encouraged him to drink some water and try to rest. A third scoutmaster repeated the process to the same results. Next, the female leader in camp approached the boy, took one look at him and said, "You miss your mom, don't you." The boy immediately broke down crying. He was only homesick.

Mom was a bit more in tune to what he needed.

The women leaders in our troop have been invaluable. However, we don't have any female direct contact leaders (scoutmasters or assistants).

Another thing you should also consider is that co-ed venturing crews require the presence of female leaders at all activities. A lot of the training overlaps. It's possible (and likely) that the women are attending to enhance their ability to fill committee positions and venture crew advisorships.

I actually do agree that there should be a woman or 2 at camp. But they should be the same as the priesthood at girls camp. When I went to camp there were always 2 priesthood holders that were on site at all times. They camped well away from the group and had a private bathroom away from others. They attended meetings and hung out at the first aid and kitchen. There were there when needed and otherwise were not part of anything. I have no issue with having a woman around for the functions that only a "mom" can do. (There was one yr at girls camp when the brothers assigned to come brought their teen boys and were very involved. The majority of the girls complained and they were asked to leave. lol)

Here the female leaders are like all the other leaders (this is other groups not lds troop, but we don't have lds only camps very often). I've talked with some of the women that go to camp here. They talked about at one camp the showers being about as much as a hose from a pole and a curtain around it, feet and tops of heads could be seen. I don't consider that an appropriate showering arrangement for a co-ed group.

Maybe I'm just a stick in the mud but I honestly don't know many men that would be comfortable if the situation were reversed.

[FunkyTown]

That's a nice thought, but not 100% correct. There is plenty of recruiting whether direct or indirect that goes on. Google "Crafting Gay Children". Scary business.

Claptrap. Tripe and claptrap.

If it's possible to 'craft gay children', then it's possible to 'craft straight children'. Ask any religious family who had a gay child how that worked out for them.

While to some extent, a gay lifestyle is a choice, we have no idea to what extent attraction is a choice. Claiming 'There is plenty of recruiting that goes on' is utterly and completely ridiculous.

If what you're saying is true, then there is only one possible logical conclusion:

You can 'craft straight children' out of gay ones. If that's the case, then why is there still after tens of thousands of years an issue? The only possible explanation is that being gay is a stronger impulse than being straight, and thus the more natural impulse.

I will, of course, withdraw my statement if you can prove your point. Please provide any logical and scientific study on 'crafting gay children'.

[Gwen]

Well of course that is a possibility....

The situation I am referring to is a toddler being watched by a gay uncle. The child is older now, but acts homosexual(feminin). If you act a certain way your going to naturally gravitate to a like group of people. In this case he learned feminin traits from his gay uncle, therefore, it is likely he will gravitate to those who already have feminin traits. It is just interesting how he picked it up from his uncle.

By this logic all fathers should get automatic custody of their sons in the situation of a divorce. If you have "single" women raising boys they will all turn out to be gay/feminine.

[Tyler90AZ]

By this logic all fathers should get automatic custody of their sons in the situation of a divorce. If you have "single" women raising boys they will all turn out to be gay/feminine.

The important thing, like ram touched on, is that there is some type of father figure in the boys life. Sad fact is that boys will go out and look for a father figure, sometimes they end up becoming gay. There is clearly other ways somebody can become gay, but that is an obvious one.

[Soulsearcher]

Not contagious, but may have an environmental component. Studies show that many gay/lesbian had sexual encounters with a male when they were young. The girls felt oppressed by the man who touched them, and had a tendency to no longer trust men. The young men felt the man was a father figure and so to be accepted and loved meant to be in a homosexual relationship.

So, we find Olympic diver Greg Louganis' first sexual encounter was with his dive coach. Now, he is gay also. I know men who have gone into prison and end up obtaining "protection" from most of the dangers of prison by being someone's girlfriend. After years of being the woman, the person often will go on in regular life with homosexual proclivities.

Note, I do not believe this is the case in every instance, but it is the case in at least some instances.

I do have to comment on this a bit. First you'd have to define what you mean by young when referring to sexual encounters. if your talking pre puberty or talking after sexual development begins. The fact they sleep with someone older by choice once they have the desire to vs they are manipulated into it with no desire by the older male. Both happen but many times most people assume the latter. Let me tell you there are plenty of eager youth looking to seduce older both gay and straight. There used to be the assumption of gay men must be looking for father figures, or lesbians were hurt by men, but most studies have moved away from it as realistic. Can it happen, probably, are the numbers high enough to be anything but a small blip, research seems to show this is the case. The case with the jails also doesn't so much demonstrate homosexuality as much as it shows self protection instinct and the aftermath. There has to be a certain distinction between people who have only wanted same sex relationship and people who have homosexual encounter because it's all they can get.

[MarginOfError]

If we're going to open a debate about the origins of homosexuality, could we do it in another thread please. The issue of how homosexuality originates in a person has very little to do with whether homosexuals are fit to be scout leaders.

[Gwen]

The important thing, like ram touched on, is that there is some type of father figure in the boys life. Sad fact is that boys will go out and look for a father figure, sometimes they end up becoming gay. There is clearly other ways somebody can become gay, but that is an obvious one.

Some type of father figure isn't enough. Mom's boyfriend often does more damage to a boy than having no male role model at all. By your logic every divorce situation that the father is able and willing to be a dad then he should get full residential custody. That simple.

I don't think they "become gay" because they went looking for a father figure. They might have feminine characteristics but that does not make them gay. They might prefer the company of gays (possibly because they won't be teased for possible feminine traits?) but that doesn't make them gay. They might even experiment with homosexual activities but that will not make them gay. At the end of the day they will figure out who they are.

Many gays had strong parental figures (male and female), friends with many straight ppl, even experimented with heterosexual activities and at the end of the day they figured out they were still gay.

The whole issue here is stereotyping and bigotry. As long as we keep separating ppl for fear that sexual orientation is contagious then things won't get better. As long as we insist you can know someone's sexual orientation by how they talk or walk or what their hobbies are things won't get better. As long as we keep thinking we can or can't be friends, work, attend church, etc with someone due to their sexual orientation things won't get better.

I worry more about the boys that don't like "manly" things (like reading and playing on the swings at recess over football and making crude jokes about their genitals) being bullied into thinking they are something instead of letting them be who they are and discover for themselves. I think those boys are more likely to experiment with homosexual activities (because that's who others have said they are) than the boy out searching for a father figure. At the end of the day I think they will figure out who they are (as I've already stated) but possibly not before making some choices they will regret.

The bigoted stereotyping needs to stop. We need to stop defining what masculine or feminine or gay is. We need to let ppl be who they are and show compassion and charity to everyone.

[Wingnut]

The whole issue here is stereotyping and bigotry. As long as we keep separating ppl for fear that sexual orientation is contagious then things won't get better. As long as we insist you can know someone's sexual orientation by how they talk or walk or what their hobbies are things won't get better. As long as we keep thinking we can or can't be friends, work, attend church, etc with someone due to their sexual orientation things won't get better.

This.

[carlimac]

Claptrap. Tripe and claptrap.

If it's possible to 'craft gay children', then it's possible to 'craft straight children'. Ask any religious family who had a gay child how that worked out for them.

While to some extent, a gay lifestyle is a choice, we have no idea to what extent attraction is a choice. Claiming 'There is plenty of recruiting that goes on' is utterly and completely ridiculous.

If what you're saying is true, then there is only one possible logical conclusion:

You can 'craft straight children' out of gay ones. If that's the case, then why is there still after tens of thousands of years an issue? The only possible explanation is that being gay is a stronger impulse than being straight, and thus the more natural impulse.

I will, of course, withdraw my statement if you can prove your point. Please provide any logical and scientific study on 'crafting gay children'.

Did you actually google the article and read it? It's not just my harebrained idea. I suggest you read it. It might shed some light for you on the darker side of this culture.

[carlimac]

I do have to comment on this a bit. First you'd have to define what you mean by young when referring to sexual encounters. if your talking pre puberty or talking after sexual development begins. The fact they sleep with someone older by choice once they have the desire to vs they are manipulated into it with no desire by the older male. Both happen but many times most people assume the latter. Let me tell you there are plenty of eager youth looking to seduce older both gay and straight. There used to be the assumption of gay men must be looking for father figures, or lesbians were hurt by men, but most studies have moved away from it as realistic. Can it happen, probably, are the numbers high enough to be anything but a small blip, research seems to show this is the case. The case with the jails also doesn't so much demonstrate homosexuality as much as it shows self protection instinct and the aftermath. There has to be a certain distinction between people who have only wanted same sex relationship and people who have homosexual encounter because it's all they can get.

Hmmm. Maybe this is where Suzie heard it.

[FunkyTown]

Did you actually google the article and read it? It's not just my harebrained idea. I suggest you read it. It might shed some light for you on the darker side of this culture.

Actually, I'm hoping that you can point me to the right one. I googled it and all I saw was a mind-bogglingly one-sided, viciously anti-gay piece of tripe which used such non-scientific studies as 'I have heard of a lot of HIV positive men having unprotected sex with boys".

Aside from the many, many, many things wrong with that single sentence, I'm hoping that this isn't the one you were pointing me to. I can't imagine anyone being taken in by that unless they already had an axe to grind. Seriously? I was embarassed to even be reading it.

[MarginOfError]

Did you actually google the article and read it? It's not just my harebrained idea. I suggest you read it. It might shed some light for you on the darker side of this culture.

Unfortunately, the author of that report has a really poor reputation as a scientist.

Judith Reisman - NewgonWiki

[carlimac]

Unfortunately, the author of that report has a really poor reputation as a scientist.

Judith Reisman - NewgonWiki

I don't care if she used the most accurate scientific method or not. Anecdote is enough to let us know there are some very bad things going on that isn't headline news.

[MarginOfError]

I don't care if she used the most accurate scientific method or not. Anecdote is enough to let us know there are some very bad things going on that isn't headline news.

Ah, I see. The "It happened once--it must be a pervasive problem" argument.

[Wingnut]

I don't care if she used the most accurate scientific method or not. Anecdote is enough to let us know there are some very bad things going on that isn't headline news.

Except that Funky asked specifically to be shown logical and scientific evidence, and you in turn pointed him to this article.

[Gwen]

This latest turn in discussion bothers me. I can't count the number of accounts I've read from anti's saying just this same thing. "When I was growing up in the church... this and this... happened. I'm just exposing the darker side of this culture."

There are some bad ppl in this world. They are everywhere, in the church, in the schools, etc. Those small anecdotal stories probably really happened, but they do not represent the group as a whole. I'm sure no one in the church wants to be judged by such stories. I'm also going to assume most gays don't want to be judged by such either.

[Tyler90AZ]

Some type of father figure isn't enough. Mom's boyfriend often does more damage to a boy than having no male role model at all. By your logic every divorce situation that the father is able and willing to be a dad then he should get full residential custody. That simple.

I don't think they "become gay" because they went looking for a father figure. They might have feminine characteristics but that does not make them gay. They might prefer the company of gays (possibly because they won't be teased for possible feminine traits?) but that doesn't make them gay. They might even experiment with homosexual activities but that will not make them gay. At the end of the day they will figure out who they are.

Many gays had strong parental figures (male and female), friends with many straight ppl, even experimented with heterosexual activities and at the end of the day they figured out they were still gay.

The whole issue here is stereotyping and bigotry. As long as we keep separating ppl for fear that sexual orientation is contagious then things won't get better. As long as we insist you can know someone's sexual orientation by how they talk or walk or what their hobbies are things won't get better. As long as we keep thinking we can or can't be friends, work, attend church, etc with someone due to their sexual orientation things won't get better.

I worry more about the boys that don't like "manly" things (like reading and playing on the swings at recess over football and making crude jokes about their genitals) being bullied into thinking they are something instead of letting them be who they are and discover for themselves. I think those boys are more likely to experiment with homosexual activities (because that's who others have said they are) than the boy out searching for a father figure. At the end of the day I think they will figure out who they are (as I've already stated) but possibly not before making some choices they will regret.

The bigoted stereotyping needs to stop. We need to stop defining what masculine or feminine or gay is. We need to let ppl be who they are and show compassion and charity to everyone.

I don't know how your getting from what I posted to this.

You made a good point when you said, "As long as we keep separating ppl for fear that sexual orientation is contagious then things won't get better." That is probably true....

The only problem, like I was getting at, is that they are suppose to be examples to the boys. That is sending a signal to the boys that hey it is alright to be gay. Which is not something a Christian? organization wants to do.

Say what you want about being born gay, but from watching those around me it seems like a choice. If it is a choice, which boy scouts are going off, then allowing a gay leader is sending the message it is a good choice.

Then you throw in the fact it is opening up a floodgate.

[Dravin]

The only problem, like I was getting at, is that they are suppose to be examples to the boys. That is sending a signal to the boys that hey it is alright to be gay. Which is not something a Christian? organization wants to do.

The Boy Scouts of America does not require Christianity of it's members. While the organization does promote the idea that one needs a faith, to my knowledge it does not specify which faith.

[MarginOfError]

I don't know how your getting from what I posted to this.

You made a good point when you said, "As long as we keep separating ppl for fear that sexual orientation is contagious then things won't get better." That is probably true....

The only problem, like I was getting at, is that they are suppose to be examples to the boys. That is sending a signal to the boys that hey it is alright to be gay. Which is not something a Christian? organization wants to do.

Say what you want about being born gay, but from watching those around me it seems like a choice. If it is a choice, which boy scouts are going off, then allowing a gay leader is sending the message it is a good choice.

Then you throw in the fact it is opening up a floodgate.

The BSA isn't a Christian organization. It's a non-denominational organization--at least it claims to be.

Even so, not all Christian organizations agree that homosexuality is wrong. The church that sponsors my troop often flies the rainbow flag under the Episcopal flag. You aren't likely to see a complaint about homosexual leaders in this troop because the chartering organization would back the leader.

[Gwen]

I don't know how your getting from what I posted to this.

You made a good point when you said, "As long as we keep separating ppl for fear that sexual orientation is contagious then things won't get better." That is probably true....

The only problem, like I was getting at, is that they are suppose to be examples to the boys. That is sending a signal to the boys that hey it is alright to be gay. Which is not something a Christian? organization wants to do.

Say what you want about being born gay, but from watching those around me it seems like a choice. If it is a choice, which boy scouts are going off, then allowing a gay leader is sending the message it is a good choice.

Then you throw in the fact it is opening up a floodgate.

Only the first 3 paragraphs were for you.

The church says it's ok to be gay. What a person is judged on is behavior. If you live the standards you can do anything a straight person can do (hold callings, go to the temple, etc). Gays can be an example of modesty, chastity, etc just like others.

One of the objections to the "gay culture" is that it's promiscuous. It can be argued that it became that way out of fear. Why would it be bad for ym (who may be struggling with their sexual orientation) to see role models that say "it's ok to be gay and not sleep around, to be honest, confident, educated, successful, true to your personal convictions. You don't have to be what Hollywood says gay is, you are not a stereotype."?

My other concern is that if the BSA segregate a specific group then are they saying it's ok to push such ppl away? Will these same "good kids" leave scouts and go to school and pick on the kid that they have decided is gay? Does it encourage bullying? Bullying has to stop and it stops by adults setting the example of acceptance.