The boy scouts shoulden’t admit they are christans because they aren’t. Christans woulden’t take a stance hurtful to homosexuals. As Jesus said what you do to the least of my brethren you do to me.
Last time I checked, I have the RIGHT to try and change things if I don’t like something [eg: the gov, an org, an action]. Why should I have to leave? This is my home and I have every right to try to make it the world I want to live in, and eventually rear children in.
By all means; work within the system to change that which you don’t like; it is your right. However, when the targeted group won’t change to accommodate your particular world view, you have the responsibility to accept that, and not label them or vilify them through the media. Another aspect of freedom in this country is your right to start your own group, and expect the same freedom from harrassment.
I am heterosexual and Christian, and I only have one thing to say:
No one, not the Boy Scouts, not the church, not ANYONE, is going to tell me who can or can’t be involved in the lives of my children. I don’t care if a person is hetero, homo, omni, bi, whatever. The decision belongs to us, out children’s parents, not any organization.
<meekly stepping down from the soapbox>
Since when have the Boy Scouts hurt homosexuals? I haven’t heard of them practicing their woodcraft to lynch any, nor have they ever claimed corporately to be Christian.
They have a code to which they’ve adhered since their inception. If your worldview doesn’t fit their code, why should they bend to you, rather than you bend to them? Start you own group.
I am a Christian. I do not hate homosexuals; in fact, I don’t hate anybody, and I’d be just as quick to come to the aid of a homosexual, or black, or hispanic, or asian, or any other race or creed. We all bleed red. It just doesn’t matter to me. BUT. I do not condone or support in any way the homosexual ‘lifestyle’. That is a moral line which I have drawn, and on which I stand. That is my right.
And that should have read “our children’s parents,” not “out children’s parents.” Whoopsie. Long day at work!
I’m a Christian, and I choose to take a moral stance against the pseudo-moralistic judging of gay people. “Hate the sin, love the sinner”? Not from what I’ve seen. “Perversion” isn’t a word I use to describe something that’s an integral part of someone I love.
I know it’s been addressed before, but “homosexual lifestyle” is a nonsensical phrase. What “lifestyle”? Most of my gay friends’ lifestyles look a lot more like mine (married with children) than my single straight neighbor’s does. And I’d much rather have them guiding my children, too.
The Boy Scouts can do whatever the hell they want. They shouldn’t expect the public to support them in their discrimination against gays or anyone else.
<kidding>By the way, Esprix, I hate to mention it, but have you noticed that all your posts seem to be about one thing?</kidding>
Precisely. Nor should they expect to have to discard their principles because ‘the public’ thinks they’re wrong.
Perhaps ‘the public’ is wrong? When something is wrong, weight of numbers doesn’t make it right. And which ‘public’ are you talking about? Be specific.
Fundamentally, this isn’t about homosexuality; it’s about a group having others’ views crammed down their throats, and not accepting that. So far, it seems to me that it’s the gays who are making an issue of it.
[Outsiders voice] Poooooony boy…let’s do it for Ponyboy! [/Outsiders voice]
(God, I hope you remember that movie- it’s an oldie)
Anyway, I have to wholeheartedly agree with this:
That is the exact issue. Private clubs, whether they discriminate or not, do not deserve public funds or support.
Zette
As the mother of a son who just became an Eagle Scout 3 months ago, and the wife, daughter, sister, and friend to other Eagle Scouts, I have to agree with Vestal Blue. I am, by birth and by CHOICE an American, and all that that word means.
And, I accept that we are far from perfect as a nation,but, like VB said, we’re the best thing out there. I know, I’ve lived in many of those other countries. And, as others have also said, the BSA has always been what it is today. This is nothing new folks.
This is making me angry. Once again, because someone doesn’t like the policies, it must automatically be wrong. I don’t agree. But, that’s what’s so great about this country, that we can disagree on an issue, and not end up in jail for our beliefs.
True. but how do you separate the good this particular organization has done for the public of this country? How does or should the public repay this service?
Wish I could stick around folks, but I gotta bail out of here until tomorrow. This is interesting.
Here is my point
Your talking about kids from about 8 years old and up.
Most of them think mom and dad did IT once well maybe twice cause they have a baby sister.
They don’t even think about sex. Now you have a Gay man wanting to be their scout leader. What is gay going to mean to that kid. The older kids ARE going to tell him. How are they going to explain it???
So maybe when asked are you gay you should reply Naw,As far as those kids are concerned I’m celibate.
OK, allow me to play the Devils Advocate for a minute. In my country, any organisation that is aimed at providing a service to a community is always subject to discrimination laws. In other words: in the Netherlands, it would be illegal for an organisation like the Boy Scouts to exclude people based on religion, sexual preference, race, et cetera, because our constitution says it is illegal to discriminate on these factors in any possible way within the nations borders.
Now, I understand that private insitutions should be able to determine their own “house rules”. But is it still OK if these house rules are violating national laws?
An example: if a US employer finds out that one of his employees is gay, he is not allowed to fire said employee solely on that fact. Because that would constitute discrimination based on sexual preference, right?
What’s different with the BSA? In what legal way does it differentiate itself from a company?
Why advocate lies? The Scouts are supposed to teach children to be virtuous. This may just be my own opinion–but I think the whole point of the protest surrounding the BSA is that gay scouts and leaders should at least be able to hold a powerful enough sense of identity and equality to -not- have to lie about themselves should it be inquired or brought up. That’s all. It’s not like they’re asking for a license to teach kids how to be homo. Besides–celibacy is already one of the mandates for being a scout, isn’t it?
I apologize if you took offense to my earlier post. Perhaps I misunderstood the point you were trying to make earlier. Perhaps you weren’t clear enough, seeing as by your own admission, none of us did.
IANAL but as I recall…the Supreme Court decision essentially revolved around whether the BSA was a “private” institution or an institution of public accomodation…Private clubs in the U.S. (like the Elks Lodge, for example )can essentially choose their own membership at will…organizations of public accomodation (like, say restaurants) are subject to laws that private groups are not subject too…Businesses are subject to certain hiring laws as well…
The SCOTUS decision essentially considers them to be a “private” group…while many folks said that the nature of the BSA (for example, they recruit actively through many schools, and often use school facilities) should qualify them as public…
It’s an unfortunate situation all the way around.
(Eagle Scout, 1980)
ColdFire,
It varies from state to state. Some states, you are protected from being fired for certain reasons (ie race, creed, color, sexual preference). Others, you have no right to work and can be fired on a whim. I tend to support the latter, because it allows employers the freedom to cut out those who can’t hack it w/o reprocussions.
As far as the Boy Scouts, I am an Eagle Scout from Northern NJ, and can only say this: I fully support the BSA in their work in shaping solid citizens. I fully believe in their right to require certain things to be a member. However, I cannot personally agree with some of their stances on certain issues, such as homosexuality. A few other posters have mentioned it, and I’ll just repeat it: Being homosexual does not make you inherently dangerous.
I think it’s a shame that it has come this far. I personally see this as an issue of “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” What doesn’t have a place in day-to-day business in an organization doesn’t need to be brought up or flaunted by one or two individuals . . .
Tripler
I say, “good”! The BSA can and has taught wonderful things to boys, but if they rigidly trap themselves into increasingly narrow categories of exclusion, they’re dooming themselves. And should.
Coldy, Juliana, justwannano: a respectful bow; warm hearts; tough minds.
Of one thing I am sure: gay isn’t a choice or a lifestyle. It’s an inborn reality, and the only real challenge is to other people in how to handle that. I can remember kids in grade school that we knew were “different”, way before I had the foggiest idea of what sex way. As time went on, light dawned: they were gay. But they were still children and they were human.
What is so wrong with kids–straight, gay, undecided–learning to respect responsible adults? For a gay child, it’s that a straight can be protective and fair. For a straight child, that a gay can be the same.
Odd the sources of insight: down w/ the flu onetime I caught a daytime talk show w/ a girl rock group (forget the name) who are mixed gay, bi and straight. They’d posed for a spread in “Playboy” to prove a point. Some of the suburban matrons asked, “didn’t it make you feel funny, being nude and knowing…that?” The answer was, “we’re friends and we work together. We don’t have to sleep together.”
Common sense; essential things like character, responsibility, self-discipline, etc.–the stuff the BSA claims to teach–may include sex but aren’t limited to it.
Unless, of course, they continue to limit themselves. Their choice, their definition, their problem.
Veb
Palandine wrote: my understanding, which could be wrong, is that the ban is against gay scout leaders, not against gay scouts
No, if you, as a Scout, come out as gay you will be stripped of your rank and asked to leave the organization. This has happened to more than one Eagle Scout.
Which leads us to Vestal Blue’s question, Since when have the Boy Scouts hurt homosexuals?
They are telling boys that if they realize, as they reach adulthood, that they are gay, all the work they have done with the Scouts will be meaningless. They are telling these boys that if they want to remain with an organization that has, we hope, become an important part of their lives they will have to lie. I think that is hurtful.
how do you separate the good this particular organization has done for the public of this country? How does or should the public repay this service?
Yes, the BSA does many good works. However, those good works do not earn them an exemption from the “public entities may not discriminate” regulations that we, as a country, have set down as law. As a private institution, as beagledave explained, they have the right to choose their own membership. I, for one, have no problem with that. Rather, I am glad that this has gotten so much public attention. I think it may serve to prevent people with differing views from becoming involved with an organization that could potentially cause much pain to their children or their children’s friends. The problem that I, and many others, have is that the BSA has, for many years, enjoyed many perks reserved for fully public institutions, including the use of school buildings and low- or no-cost use of public parks and other facilities.
To use a horribly exaggerated example to make my point-if a white supremacy group (a nice, nonviolent one whose members don’t want to harm anyone, just want things to be “separate but equal, please”) were to spend many hours each week cleaning up the highways, maintaining hiking trails and bringing hot lunches to the elderly, would you give them permission to recruit in your elementary school?
My first husband was a Boy Scout leader, and we had many a conversation about these subjects. This was ten years ago, too.
I didn’t agree with the policy that required a belief in God. At the time, I called myself a Christian, but something in me just felt that it was wrong to deny a boy the opportunity to share in the many good things Scouting has to offer (and I don’t think anyone will question the fact that Scouting does indeed have a lot to offer) simply because he doesn’t believe in God.
The other leader of my husband’s troop was an older single man. We believed he was gay or bi, but never knew for sure. It didn’t matter to me personally. He was a terrific leader (his Scouts tended to stay with him from start to finish). The thought that this fine man may not be able to lead because of his (possible) sexual orientation makes me queasy.
Now I have a son. He’s only a year old, but what do I tell him if he wants to join the Scouts? Do I deny him the opportunity to learn all the wonderful things that he can learn as a Scout, or do I say “No, Son, you can’t be a Scout because Mommy doesn’t agree with some of their policies?”
And could someone please refresh my memory here–do the Boy Scouts get any federal funding? IIRC, they do, in which case, they really can’t discriminate based on sexual orientation or religion. Please correct me if I’m wrong on the federal-funding question.
As a former Girl Scout, I don’t recall any mention of sexuality at all. Ever. I do remember the pledge, though:
“On my honor, I will try
To serve God,
My country,
Mankind,
And to live by the Girl Scout Law.”
I remember saying it often enough (that should be obvious, considering that I still remember it after 20 years). But I don’t recall a belief in God being an absolute requirement for Girl Scouting. Things may have changed, though. I wonder if I’ve still got my handbooks…