Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Ken Blackwell :: Townhall.com Columnist
A Scout is Reverent
by Ken Blackwell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


“Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports.”
— George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

The presidential candidates need to speak out while the spotlight is on Pennsylvania. There is an opportunity for voters in Pennsylvania and across America to know where the candidates stand on an important constitutional issue.

The City Council of Philadelphia is attacking the Boy Scouts of America, seeking to drive them out of a historic location because the Scouts teach traditional moral values, consistent with the Scout Oath and Scout Law. City Council’s action violates the First Amendment, and the Scouts should fight this in federal court.

The Boy Scouts of America has been shaping the character of young American boys since it was founded in 1910. The Scouts challenge and encourage boys and young men how to be honorable and productive members of society. They achieve this through teaching, adult mentoring, and behavioral example, among other things.

In 1928, Philadelphia recognized the social value of the Scouts by agreeing to a perpetual lease whereby the Scouts could have a headquarters facility for $1 a year. But just last year the City Council voted 16-1 to violate their contractual obligation by breaking the lease. As of next month, the Boy Scouts’ rent for that facility would be a whopping $200,000 per year.

What prompted the City Council to take such severe action? What was the Scouts’ crime? They have kept teaching the values that they have been teaching for almost a century.

From my early years in Scouting, I remember there are two things a Boy Scout must learn to say from memory before he can advance in rank. The first is the Scout Oath, starting, “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law.” The last line of the Oath includes the scout’s vow to be “morally straight.” And the last tenet in the 12 principles of the Scout Law is that a scout is reverent.

Ever since 1910, Scouting has taught that part of being a committed Scout is a traditional understanding of sexuality. Though Scouting respects adherents of various faiths, it has always had a Bible-based morality as the foundation of its values.

The Boy Scouts of America believes expressed homosexuality is inconsistent with its credo. They believe their “duty to God” and promise to be “reverent” requires fidelity to that traditional faith. As a result, the Scouts do not allow openly homosexual individuals in their adult leadership ranks.

But the Philadelphia City Council has bought into a radical homosexual agenda lock, stock, and barrel. Not only does the Council provide full recognition of special homosexual rights, they also will obviously attack any organization that does not adopt its newfound agenda. The Council is utterly intolerant of any person or organization that does not embrace its new “tolerance,” and is seeking to drive the Scouts from the city.

One consequence of democracy is if elected leaders, in a city, state, or nation, choose to embody a radical agenda and attack traditional values, they can usually get away with it. There is nothing to stop government from enacting wrong policy.

But there is one problem with what the Philadelphia City Council is doing: it is not only wrong, it is illegal. In fact, it is unconstitutional. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights constrains the actions of every city in America. And, targeting the Boy Scouts because of their religious expressions violates three of our country’s most sacred First Amendment guarantees.

First, this violates the Boy Scouts’ free speech. To discriminate against the Scouts because of what they say about homosexuality is called viewpoint discrimination, and the Supreme Court has held that viewpoint discrimination is always unconstitutional. Sometimes national security or other extremely important interests allow government to forbid speaking on certain topics. But if any given subject is permissible, then the government can never force those who take a certain side of the issue to be silenced.

Second, this violates the Establishment Clause. Government cannot target any person or group for punishment because of religious faith. The Scouts base their moral teaching on a traditional understanding of the Bible. To take action against them because of that faith goes to the core of what religious liberty is meant to forbid.

And third, it violates the Scouts’ fundamental right of association. The Supreme Court held just a few years ago that the Scouts have a right, as a private organization, to have its own standards for members and leaders based on their own values. Philadelphia is attacking the Scouts for exactly what the Supreme Court has ruled that the Scouts legally can do.

So the Boy Scouts’ rent in Philadelphia is about to skyrocket, seeking to drive them out. The Scouts must fight. They must now look to the federal courts to vindicate those rights, sending the message that liberal politicians who push a radical agenda will hit a brick wall when their actions violate the Supreme Law of the Land.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mr. Blackwell, a contributing editor at Townhall.com, is a senior fellow at the Family Research Council and American Civil Rights Union.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Ken Blackwell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
The Boy Scouts are the last bastion
of moral conduct left for teaching of our youth. Because of the positive aspects of Scouting, many cities have made special arrangements with Scouting organizations to help them financially. Like everything else the separation of church and state /secular progressive crowd have attacked, the Boy Scouts are a big target because of their continued adherance to a moral code that they refuse to change because of the social climate of the day. What was wrong then is still wrong despite what leftist want to change. Because they are a private organization, government cannot make them change their rules; but, they feel they can use economic coersion to try to force the desired changes. I agree with Ken that what that city (and several others) is doing or has done is unconstitutional (or illegal in the case of not honoring signed contracts), but liberal judges and federal and state officials will twist the words of the constitution as they have been doing for the last 50 years to interpret it to mean what they want it to mean to achieve the social engineering they are advancing. Until "We the People" quit acting like sheep and stand up to and throw out the tyrants, they will continue to play politically correct games to cater to the special interests that keep their campaign coffers full (or keep the protesters off their door steps).
Boy Scouts are not about religion. It is about teaching boys team work, self reliance, maintaining good moral character, duty and honor. It is about the only place left where boys can learn to be fine, upstanding men.

THE BSA BUILT THE PLACE!!!
They then DONATED it to Philly in exchange for cheap rent in perpetuity. Apparently in Philly "perpetuity" only means "until some whiny interest group gets its panties in a wad. The City Council member who started this nonsensical exercise is an openly gay and MILITANTLY gay character named Odisio Diaz. He must think he's on a modern day "Odyssey Into Political Correctness" or something.

This is why PA took it in the shorts (no pun intended) when that slimewad "Fast Eddie" Rendell became governor. The FIRST thing he tried to do was gut the statewide uniform firearm laws that were supported by most of the people. Typical lib. Can't trust the people to think the right way, vote the right way or live the right way so we'll just ram it down their throats.

-Ray

How Ironic Mr. Blackwell
Since when are facts, fairness, and reason not conservative policies? Mr. Blackwell talks all around the issue but it is clear that he wants to discriminate against gay men and boys who would be scouts or scout leaders, not based on facts or reason but based on his individual bias against this class of citizens.

How ironic. How sad, that so many blacks, while still attempting social integration themselves long after legal integration, will voice support for a policy of the Boy Scouts of America that is so unfair.

Today science and medicine conclude that homosexuality is not a moral choice but is a state of being. Enlightened counties, states, and individuals have reached this conclusion as well – Mr. Blackwell broadcasts a sad commentary on the residual ignorance on this subject and his words only give bigots ammunition to stigmatize and marginalize a segment of our population solely due to their sexual orientation.


Science and medicine
It is a falacy to continue to cite science and medicine as support for homosexual behavior. All the suppose research done by homosexuals to support their own choices have been dicounted for what it really was veiled attempts to justify their actions. If something as sensitive as homosexuality were able to be proven via science or medicine it there would be no need to be subject the rest of us to all the pressure applied by homosexuals to get people to accept their lifestyle as perfectly normal and accptable. I do not agree with anyone who would discriminate against homosexuals, but neither do I agree with homosexuals to dictate the ideals of any private orgnization. If homosexuals do not agree with the creeds of the BSA they should start their own organizaiton with the bylaws and ideals that they accept for their own.

I certainly disagree that discrimination because of sexual orentation has anything to do with the creeds and ideals of the BSA. This orginazaition has been in existance for many years and there is no veiled attempt at all. The ideals and values have been in place for many years and will continue to be in place regardless of the pressures of those who would attempt to force them to abandon these valuable and protective ideals.

Stormrunner
Why not start your own organization? I can see it now "The Gay/Trans gendered Scouts of America", only obstacle you would have to overcome is how to allocate your 12 members among your 130,000 volunteer Gay scoutmasters.

stormrunner
What you apparently don't care to understand is that a large component of Scouting is overnight camping. I am the parent of a Cub Scout, and a den leader. I would not trust my son to the care of a homosexual in a sleep-over. Period.

Now, you may call that bigoted; I don't care. But no reasonable, caring parent would sacrifice his son in such a manner. Would you allow your child to sleep with a Catholic priest after the scandals? What about Michael Jackson?

You may decry the policy against homosexuals as being unfair, I call it prudent. Incidentally, I personally know of an instance where a fellow (homosexual) scout molested a younger camper. Is it unfair to ban him from Scouting? Or is it better to put more young boys at risk?

liteside....
Now THAT's funny!!

Stormrunner fails to recall
the right of association. Call it what you will, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, I don't care, you still cannot force private individuals to accept someone or something. Individuals have a right, as misguided as it might be, to choose to NOT associate with whomever they so please.

Dont' get me wrong. I believe that individuals who do so lose out and fail to gain perspectives that could strengthen and enrich their lives. For what it's worth, I wouldn't trust ANY man with an overnight trip with my son unless I knew him VERY well. You never know what secrets people hide, and, as Irene Adler pointed out above, it just is not prudent for parents to sacrifice their children on the alter of political correctness.

liteside
"Why not start your own organization? I can see it now "The Gay/Trans gendered Scouts of America", only obstacle you would have to overcome is how to allocate your 12 members among your 130,000 volunteer Gay scoutmasters. "

Brilliant, that has to rank among the best comments ever on Townhall!

I spent a total of 10 years in Cub Scouts & Boy Scouts, and I still treasure my Eagle rank more than any of the degrees, awards or other recognitions I've achieved since then. But if Big Brother ever forces the BSA to become other than what it is, I say it would be better to disband.

in perpetuity


It bears repeating,
the city of Philadelphia welshed on the contract.

The contract was that the city would allow the scouts to lease the building "in perpetuity' (forever) in exchange for the Scouts deeding the property to the city.

Anyone , including gays, might be well advised touse caution in accepting the word of the city in any future dealings.

If the Dems win in November
Get ready for more of this foolishness. The radicals who have taken the reins of the party, headed by Howard ”Yee-haw“ Dean, intend to force a liberal agenda on this country, the Constitution be damned. Be forewarned!

Hmmm....
Since Philly reneged on the contract, BSA should get the building back. I hope the BSA takes it all the way to SCOTUS, if necessary, to get the building back.

The homo and PC crowd are fighting traditional morality at every turn, and this is but one engagement. Stormrunner says it is not "fair." He is delusional if he believes that life is fair. Some people die young. Some are murdered. Some choose degenerate sexual practices that others find disgusting and sinful. Many of them predictably contract AIDS.

So which is more fair? Does BSA give up their mission to mentor boys and provide them with responsible and moral male role models? Or do homosexuals keep their abnormal sexual practices in their bedrooms and away from BSA?

So Stormrunner, Kiss my axx. Wait!! Strike that!! Just stay the hell away from me and BSA!!

Would you send your..
13 year old daughter out camping with a 21 year old male? I think not. Well, it is the same thing when you send a 13 year old boy out camping with a 21 year old homosexual male. It is that simple.

Philly joining other cities of Sodom.
Having grown up in Philadelphia I was both a cub and a boy scout. The oaths haven't changed, the moral principals of the scouts haven't changed. They were in fact held in high esteem as I was growing up in the 50s and 60s. And before that when my dad was a scout. What has changed? The embracement by local governments and politicians of the new cultural relativism, anything goes....except traditional judeo-Christian moral values that this country was founded on.
Politicians have caved to the gay lobby and other secular oriented interest groups. No wonder this country has become so debased.

BSA
First of all, I say the Boy Scouts should sue the city for breach of contract. Then take this to the Supreme Court and knock those moronic city council members down into the ground. The BSA have every right to keep their moral, laws and codes intact without the interference of the gay agenda. If they gays want to have scouting, set up your own organization. Who is stopping you? I am a proud Eagle Scout that sides with the Boy Scouts of America.
Stormrunner, start your own troop with your 12 members! I guarantee it wouldn't last a week.
City of Philadelphia - Shame on you!
I guess the old name "City of Brotherly Shove" is more appropos!

Shame on Philadelphia.
Just take out a patent on "The City of Brotherly Love" and leave the Boy Scouts alone.

This is Discrimination
I don’t think I was arguing about the right to freely associate. That is a right I support. I do not support government support of organizations that discriminate. And as predictable on here as the sun coming up, there will be those who wrongly equate pedophilia with homosexuality. That is ignorance and I would hope that those on here who value the truth would stand up for the truth.

I was in the boy scouts; every young boy should have that opportunity. And for an eleven year old, who happens to be gay, to be denied that experience is harmful to him. The BSA has that right of exclusion – but not to be supported by a government that gets its tax dollars from both straights and gays – and not from a government that is founded on equality.

And to assume a gay scout leader is going to molest your son is also erroneous. Are you, a straight male, not to be trusted with your neighbor’s daughter? This is pure ignorance, superstition, and downright unjustified prejudice.

As to the claim that the conclusions of the AMA, the APA, as well as every other major medical association are due to a gay conspiracy is laughable.


IN PHILLY THERE IS:
1. A controlled liberal press! (This is true of the local T.V. stations but mostly the print media. The former, however, is so pathetic they hardly count.)

2. A Democratic machine and a liberal city government running things for over 30 years. (Guess what? The murder rate is at an all time high. No big surprise there.)


3. The City of Brotherly Love also has a new name. San Francisco East!


Next they'll ban the Boy Scouts completely and make it a crime to utter the name "Boy Scouts." Just normal liberal, left-wing tactics.

Yep. San Fran and Philly. The Sister Cities.

And perfect together.



stormrunner
"the 1%-to-3% of adults who practice homosexuality (3) account for between a fifth and a third of all child molestation."

"It concluded that homosexual acts were involved in 25% to 40% of the cases of child molestation recorded in the scientific and forensic literature."


http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet2.html

You may discount the source if you want, but I will still protect my child despite your prejudices. Remember, going back to the Catholic priest scandal, those priests were gay.



Assuming The US Scout Movement...
...to be the same as that in the UK, that is comprised of misfits and social inadequates, I cannot imagine why any self respecting homosexual would want to join anyway!!

vespanat
Famous scouts:

Henry "Hank" Aaron, Baseball Superstar (Boy Scout)

Bill Alexander, U.S. Representative from Arkansas (Eagle Scout)

Gary Anderson, U.S. Representative from New York (Eagle Scout)

Neil Armstrong - Astronaut & First Man On The Moon (Eagle Scout)

Charles Bennett, U.S. Representative from Florida (Eagle Scout)

William Bennett, Former Secretary of Education (Eagle Scout)

Bill Bradley, Pro basketball star and U.S. Sneator from New Jersey (Eagle Scout)

more famous scouts
James Brady, Former Press Secretary to President Reagan (Eagle Scout)

Milton Caniff, Comic Strip Artist "Steve Canyon" (Eagle Scout)

Bill Clinton, U.S. President (Cub Scout)

Walter Cronkite - Journalist, T.V. commentator

Willaim Dannemeyer, U.S. Representative from California (Eagle Scout)

William C. DeVries, M.D., Transplanted first artificial heart (Eagle Scout)

Arthur Eldred, (First Eagle Scout)

Daniel J. Evans, Former US Senator and Governor from the state of Washington (Eagle Scout)


more social misfits (vespanat)
Gerald Ford, 38th President of the U.S. (1st Eagle Scout to become President)

Harrison Ford, Actor (Life Scout)

Murphy J. "Mike" Foster, Governor of Louisiana (Eagle Scout)

Bill Gates, Founder of Microsoft (Life Scout)

Richard Gere - Actor

David Hartman, Actor (Life Scout)

Bruce Jenner - Olympic Gold Medal Decathlon (Cub Scout)

John F. Kennedy, U.S. President (Star Scout)

Gary Locke, Governor of Washington State (Eagle Scout)


yet more social inadequates
James Lovell - Astronaut (Eagle Scout)

Richard Lugar, U.S. Senator from Indiana (Eagle Scout)

J. Willard Marriott, Jr., President, Marriott Corporation (Eagle Scout) The office of Mr. Marriott has asked that Eagle congratulatory letters not be requested.

Branford Marsalis, Jazz musician (Life Scout)

William McCool, Space Shuttle Columbia Pilot (Eagle Scout)

Jim Morrison - Rock Legend (Boy Scout)

Sam Nunn, U.S. Senator from Georgia (Eagle Scout)

Merlin Olsen, Actor, Pro Football Player and Sportscaster (Boy Scout)

Ellison Onizuka, Challenger Astronaut (Eagle Scout)

H. Ross Perot, Self Made Billionaire and Presidential Candidate (Eagle Scout)

more scouts
J.J. Pickle, U.S. Representative from Texas (Eagle Scout)

Samuel Pierce, Former Secreatry of Housing & Urban Development (Eagle Scout)

Eddie Rabbitt, Country/Western singer (Boy Scout)

John Ritter, Actor

Richard Roundtree, Actor (Boy Scout)

Nolan Ryan, Pro Baseball Player

Alberto Salazar, 3-time winner, NYC Marathon (Life Scout)

Harrison Salisbury, Pulizer Prize winning Author (Eagle Scout)

John Schneider, Actor/Singer (Cub Scout)


clearly losers
Willaim Sessions, Former FBI Director (Eagle Scout)

Howard K. Smith, Former ABC-TV commentator (Boy Scout)

Steven Spielberg, Film Director/Producer (Eagle Scout)

Mark Spitz - Olympic Gold Medal Swimmer (Cub Scout)

James Stewart - Actor (Boy Scout)

Wallace Stegner, Pulitzer Prize winning Author (Eagle Scout)

James Stewart, Actor

George Strait - Country/Western Singer (Cub Scout)

Percy Sutton, Chairman of CBS (Eagle Scout)


Hey Stormrunner...
I want to discriminate against homosexuals! They should not be allowed to educate, counsel, adopt, mentor, or associate with our youngsters. Most sensible folks would agree. Disagreement would qualify one as nonsensible.

Keep your hands off our kids you freak.


even more social outcasts
John Tesh, TV Celebrity (Eagle Scout)

Joe Theisman, Sportscaster, former NFL player (Life Scout)

Peter Ueberroth, Former Commissioner of Baseball (Cub Scout)

Paul Winfield, Actor (Cub Scout)


vespanat
Those examples were only from the U.S. Would you like some names from your country or elsewhere? Or are you not interested in learning about any more losers?

Scouting should distract boys from sex
instead of giving gay men more young 'prospects' to pervert. Nobody with any sense wants to send their son on a boy scout trip with a gay leader because we don't want to risk perverted things happening to our children. Some gays might be OK to go on camping trips with, still parents feel safer not risking it with gays they don't know. Boys that are too young to be 'sexual' shouldn't be discriminated against for being perceived as gay. Can't everybody just enjoy a camping trip without making their sexual orientation an issue?

Discrimination?
Why is it that homosexuals consider themselves to be an ethnic group? They want special rights because they have sex with same sex. It is not straights forcing gays to do what they do not want to do. It is gays trying to force others, sometimes under force of law, to accept and celebrate their sexual activities. The comment about an 11 year old gay was really over the top. How would an 11 year old know that he is a homosexual unless he has been trained to be one? I entered the Boy Scouts at 11 and left a 22 year old Assistant Scoutmaster. During this entire period of time no scout leader talked to us about sex. The scouts have a set of rules that teach boys to be men. ONe of those rules is to be morally straight by their definition and not the definition of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance. I have the same attitude as another writer and that is I would not permit a child of mine to spend the night anywhere with a homosexual.

Blimey!!!
Quite a response there Irene!!! Actually I have a small confession, I was once a Scout here so I suppose I shouldn't be casting too many stones!! During my short memberhsip I did find it a very unpleasant experience. Nowadays they do seem a rather peculiar bunch, on this side of the Atlantic anyway.
Surprised to see Jim Morrison was once a member, not sure he hailed as a great standard bearer for US morality (in my humble opinion he is very over rated as a musician too).
Please do enlighten me as to some British former members though. I can probably better judge their 'loser' (not my word but never mind) status.

Federal Intervention or Recall
The San Diego boy Scouts are going through the same persecution by the ACLU from ONE person's complaint. The ACLU sued the city and recieved A $900,000.00 judgement so the City council ordered a praise the ACLU day led by one of the Gays in the City council. This wierd bunch also has the city as a sanctuary city for law breakers and OK'd Gay marriages. We need government control if America is to survive as a free nation.

stormrunner
Check out these numbers from our government:

In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. This research is apparently the first survey that has reported substantial homosexual molestation of girls. Suggestions for future research were offered.

PMID: 11501300 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11501300

Irene
And the list goes on and on, thanks....I am humbled to have something in common with all these "misfits and social inadequates."

One point that hasn't been brought up (ad in answer to the "homosexuals are not pedophiles" baloney that I know is coming)--Scouting is for boys right up to age 18. Think about it...a practicing gay scout leader in the 20s-40s age bracket in close quarters with 16-17 year olds. Better yet, don't think about it.

Irene, Please....
'...take your point but you have gone beyond the pale citing John Teshes former membership as proof of the Scouting Movements lack of 'loserness' (if indeed that is a real word!!!)

vespanat
No, you didn;t use the word "loser" but "misfits" and "social inadequates". Potato, potahto. But I'll be happy to supply you with those names.

Sir David Attenborough - Naturalist, TV Personality

John Major - Prime Minister

Paul McCartney MBE - Songwriter, Entertainer

George Michael - Singer/Songwriter

Sterling Moss OBE - Motor Racing Champion

Keith Richards, Songwriter/Musician

While I agree with you regarding Jim Morrison, a glance at those names will show that most at least try to be "trustworthy, brave,..."

Irene Adler - Being Gay Is Not Immoral
In their amicus brief (Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning), The American Psychological Association, stated:

The State’s official discrimination against same-sex couples harms the children being raised by these parents. Empirical research studies have consistently found that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. It is the quality of parenting that predicts children’s psychological and social adjustment, not the parents’ sexual orientation or gender. If their parents’ relationships are legally recognized, the children of same-sex couples will benefit from the legal stability and other familial benefits that this recognition offers, as well as from elimination of state-sponsored stigmatization of their families.

The Association has more than 155,000 members and affiliates, including the majority of psychologists holding doctoral degrees from accredited universities in this country. That’s 155,000, just how many expert opinions do I need? And how many do you have supporting your position?


vespanat
John Tesh? I don't know - the guy has made a lot of money, and is a household name. He may not be to your liking, but that doesn't mean he is a loser.

Before you state the obvious, clearly Keith Richards doesn't make anyone's list as holding high moral standards.

And Furthermore Irene
In the same case the National Association of Social Workers stated, as for the assumption that children are better off with heterosexual parents. There is no empirical basis for this proposition. To the contrary, all the social science research on same-sex parenting has reached the same, unequivocal conclusion: lesbian and gay couples raise children who are as healthy, happy and well-adjusted as those raised by heterosexual couples. Based on all the measures by which child development is analyzed, there is no meaningful distinction between children raised by same-sex couples and children raised by opposite-sex couples. Indeed, there are no scientifically valid social science studies establishing that children raised by an intact same-sex couple are any differently adjusted as compared with those raised by an intact opposite-sex couple.

The National Association of Social Workers is the largest social work association in the world, with 153,000 members and chapters in every state as well as internationally. That’s 153,000, just how many expert opinions do I need? And how many do you have supporting your position?

And by the way, most child molestation is by straights.

stormrunner
Firstly, nobody said that being gay was immoral. I said that I would not trust my son to a gay Scoutmaster.

If you look at one of the figures posted earlier, 46% of adult homosexual men report being molested by another man during childhood. Of the approximately 3% who admit to being homosexual, 46% were molested by men? That figure is shocking.

Secondly, with regard to the APA: you're kidding, right? Everybody knows that that organization bases its official opinions on politics - particularly leftist politics - and those who dissent face disciplinary action. Most of those who don't agree simply keep their mouths shut, which doesn't mean they all agree; it means they are cowed into submission.

Irene...
...your inclusion of George Michael is a tad ironic given the nature of the debate!!!

Stormrunner
Homosexual acts are immoral. They are regarded as thus by the majority of the world's population.

Fringe groups do not get to decide for the rest of us what is moral and what is not.

Face it: homosexuality is immoral and a perversion, and it will never truly be accepted by the majority as anything less.

American Medical Assn. Position
And for those interested in facts rather than knee jerk homophobia:

http://www.ama.com.au/web.nsf/doc/WEEN-5GA2YX

And for those who don't believe in knee jerk homophobia:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/08/050803064454.h tm


Stormrunner - Do you know any lawyers?
With all due respect, basing an opinion on a brief filed in a lawsuit is a bit silly. No, it is inane. Briefs are the ultimate in spin, half-truth, and outright misrepresentation. Attorneys are paid to put their clients' positions in the best possible light, and not meant to be an objective statement of the truth.

Oh, stormrunner
Please don't throw that little canard that most child molestation is by straights. There are 300,000,000 people in this country, approximately 3% of whom are homosexual. Of course there will be more molestations by straight people, simply because 97% of the 300,000,000 are straight. However, if only 3% of the people are homosexual and are committing as many as 30% of the molestations, this tells me that homosexuals are more likely to molest children.


vespanat
Touche!

Dear God ...
I miss the days when sexual orientation referred to whether a couple (man and woman) were enjoying anatomically correct sex in the "missionary" position, or were enjoying a version that had the female in the dominant position. Today it refers to the anatomically incorrect sex practices of some versus the correct anatomical sex practices of others. There is nothing correctly oriented in the aberrant behavior known as homosexuality. It is a preversion.

Does McCain really have courage?
If he does and he believes in doing what is right...he will speak out against what is happening to the Scouts in PA and other parts of America.

But will he? I doubt it. This is what makes me so sad regarding our current state of affairs.

Three senators are running for president: one is a power drunk liar, one is a anti-american black separatist and the other is a philosophically inconsistent, "pretend happy" mean man. None of them are honest and courageous people.

If McCain is a true hero...we will hear outrage, but the I am sure he fears making the gay activists mad.

He doesn't mind making his base mad.


Identifiers
A friend of mine in the psychological community pointed out that homosexuals are the only group that identifies themselves by their sexuality. Of course, he said that a good many years ago and there are some other sexual deviations that have begun sexual self-identification. But my friend went on to say, "I have no desire to be identified by where I put my [sex organ]."

How a man indentifes himself tells us what is important to him about himself and lets us know what things he intends to purse. I am a man, son, husband, father, and pastor. These things are not what I do, they are what I am, but they direct what I do. If a man identifies himself as a homosexual, he is telling you what he is and what characterisitc directs his actions. A man who idenitifies himself as a homosexual should not be trusted with adolescent boys whose sexual identity is still forming and who can be talked into all manner of abberant behavior that actually runs contrary to what they would do if left alone.

Are there decent homosexuals? Of course. The BSA has not spoken out against homosexuals, but against those who practice homosexual behavior and publically identify as homosexuals. All of us have moral deviances in our make-up. The question is what we do about it: Do we claim we cannot help ouselves and thus give in to the temptation, or even call our
deviations "normal,' or do we recognize these devaint traits for what they are and supress them.

stormrunner apparently lacks
a knowledge of history. Your statements would have more credibility if what was considered mental illness weren't controlled by politics. The AMA, APA, NIMH, and NAMI, are all so steeped in politics and political correctness, on many subjects, they cannot be trusted. Kinda like the IPCC and globull warming. But then, you probably believe that as well.

Really Ken- Missionary Position?
I would have thought Kinsey and all the subsequent research would have put that to rest. If you don't participate in oral sex, then you are now in the minority.



A futile effort
Quite a few of you have made valiant attempts to discuss the issue with gay activists but having read many debates on numerous sites over the past few years I have come to the conclusion that it is a futile effort. It's a never-win situation for either side that will never cease. Watch as this thread devolves into bitter bickering and name-calling as the gay activists begin to lose ground. The same pattern is observed here at TH in "discussions" between atheists/secularists and people of faith.

It begins just as "stormrunner" began it here with all the right buzzwords. "We are enlightened and all those who disagree with our agenda are unenlightened (ignorant), intolerant, bigots." Liberals, being the gullible folks that they are, jump on the bandwagon because they love to be considered enlightened. It sounds cool to them and they don't realized the term is misused by the activists. As used by the activists it doesn't mean intelligent, informed, and right; it means suckered and indoctrinated.

(to be continued)

A futile effort, Part II
Watch as the term ignorant changes to stupid and intolerant becomes hater. Only the naive fall into the "I want to be enlightened so I'm with you" ploy.

Next come the "medical and scientific" studies that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that ...
Never mind that "all" major associations have come to the same pro-gay activist agenda conclusion is a gross exageration and a lie. Never mind that studies, statistics, and conclusions are slanted and biased. And when Irene Adler's cited studies trump "stormrunners" in accuracy and reliability, the gay activists will move on to Phase III.

(to be continued)

Stormrunner

That's not sex according to the Clintons,
but the AMA says STD's are being passed via oral sex.

Kinsey is so last century.

Stormrunner

That's not sex according to the Clintons,
but the AMA says STD's are being passed via oral sex.

Kinsey is so last century.

A futile effort, Part III
Phase III is when the gay activists become frustrated and angry and resort to insults and name-calling. As I write this the posts are coming in so fast that mine can't keep up with them and I note that my perception is proven to be correct; Phase III has begun already.

By the way, stormburner:

1) What the Philly city council did IS discrimination, bias, intolerance, and bigotry (not to mention illegal as Mr. Blackwell points out), whether the group is the BSA or the HRC or GLSEN or whatever.

2) Your objection to the gummint supporting an organization that "discriminates" shows your bias and bigotry because the BSA is exercising its legal right to "free association," not discrimination. Discrimination is in the eyes of the beholder and is not always negative (people have "discriminating" taste in food, style, furnishings, etc.). The govt supports many "discriminatory" organizations and efforts that are opposed by a significant number of citizens--Planned Parenthood, comprehensive sex ed, SCHIP, etc.



TO: johnfw
Well johnfw, wind the clock back and your arguments would have been equally spouted by some of our legacy legislators of the likes of Orval Faubus, George Wallace, and Strom Thurmond against the minority du jour. There is a very conservative concept called the tyranny of the majority. And it maintained discrimination against Jews, blacks, women, and now homosexuals – homosexuals are not the cause of the dissolution of the family – divorce and out of wedlock children are at the core – a symptom of the current heterosexual population.

All of this doesn’t change the fact that in recent decades, the status of gays and lesbians has changed as homosexuality has become more visible – and as the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the National Association of Social Workers, and even the World Health Organization – all conclude that homosexuality is not chosen and that it is a normal and natural variation of the human sexual orientation.

The equality afforded gays in an increasing number of nations, in an increasing number of states in America, and increasingly among our youth, is undeniable. One has to ask themselves at some point if a God given characteristic of human variation, not so unlike being left-handed, is to be a basis for continued discrimination? And if you had a young son who happened to be gay would you want your government to support a BSA that refused to accept him only because of a sexual orientation that he did not choose?

The BSA has a restrictive membership policy, which prohibits participation by atheists, agnostics, and "known or avowed" homosexuals. They have a right to this policy. But as a discriminatory organization, they do not have a right to government subsidy.


I am rather surprised
Can we take anything vespanat says seriously? He insults all scouts by calling them "misfits" and "social inadequates." Is this how you usually classify young boys and men? I think calling people younger than you names is a sign of some kind of social ill.

Just because you think something, vespanat, does not make it necessarily so. How many scouts do you know personally? What is it that makes them social inadequates? misfits? I know numerous scouts, and I find them to be great social servants, polite, able to use skills learned in scouting that their non-scouting friends are unable to do, and on and on.

Rather than drinking and smoking pot on weekends, I wish many of my high school students would join their scouting friends in the world of "misfits" and "social inadequates."

Why don't gays form their own organization and keep straights out? Why must they attack an established organization just because they do not agree with their code of conduct?

I am disappoointed that someone would be so intolerant and unkind as to use stereotypes to try to make a point.

stormrunner
I agree that certain organizations should not receive government funding. I propose we start with:

The ACLU
Planned Parenthood
The Folsom Street Fair
AARP
The NAACP
The Alliance for Open Society International (a George Soros organization)
Tides Foundation

No, Irene Adler
"Remember, going back to the Catholic priest scandal, those priests were gay."

No. They were pedophiles. They were also xians.


Dottie...
...I do apologise if my light hearted remark has caused such offence. I do have to say that here in Blighty the Scouting movement is seen as a rather archaic and 'staid' institution. Current members have recently been on television attempting to make it more attractive to the nations youth but all the interviewees I saw confirmed all my prejudices I'm afraid.
My own personal experience when I was a member was that it's fascistic conformity and endemic bullying were too much for a pale sensitive chap like myself to bear so I left after a short time.
Given the subject of the debate, your comment about using stereotypes to make a point is so laced in irony that I don't know where to begin!!!

Scientific???
A number of gay people insist that their genes cause them to be gay. However about 60-80% of the population has the same genes. (It varies with who is giving the data.) 3% is gay. So if their argument was true then most of us would be gay and the population would decline quickly. Why is 97% straight? Because the idea that a gene causes a person to be gay is only an idea and it isn't necessarily correct.

Also, I know gay families with kids. I can't say that the kids are the same as the kids of straights. The girls turned to sex with boys very early to prove they aren't gay and the boys generally end up gay because they were taught that way.

MellorSJ2
So why weren't most of the priests' victims girls?

Contract Breach
This case is clearly a case of breach of contract.

stormrunner
"The BSA has a restrictive membership policy, which prohibits participation by atheists, agnostics, and "known or avowed" homosexuals. They have a right to this policy. But as a discriminatory organization, they do not have a right to government subsidy."
---------
There is no government subsidy here. Scouts built the building and gave it to the city as part of a nationwide plan. They built several buildings across the US actually.

The Philly facility: Scouts maintain it and have done mulitmillion dollar upgrades to the facility. The city is not a loser here and in fact comes out way ahead of the curve if you count the added long term benefit to the city through this youth program.

Regardless of one's belief, the Scouts here (actual people, kids and youth...not some political board or corporate HQ)are the ones who end up suffering for the political bullying that Philly is attempting. The local council tried making ammends by changing their local policy to meet the demands of Philly. National BSA said no go as it puts them at risk for lawsuits and such from trial lawyers.

Philly BSA Council is caught in the middle. They now have to choose to cut 1000 youth from summer camp or raise more cash to pay the rent. With the economy as is, and all organizations now drowning us all with all sorts of fundraisers, it looks like too bad so sad to 1000 kids for summercamp.

Way to go Philly.


vespanat doesn't like criticism
You, sir, like to make flip remarks and then pretend you were just joking. It doesn't make any difference to me that you are an unkind person.

I think there is more to your feelings about scouts than you are letting on. Please explain how it is fascist. I find that to be interesting. I don't know what your scouting group was like, but you should not generalize. Perhaps you had a mean den mother or some such, or perhaps you don't like the bugs, dirt, and smoky air that goes with camping. I do not know what your motiviation for trashing the organzation is.

Maybe you just don't like groups that exclude gays, or you hate groups that expect people to actually accomplish something before they are rewarded. I have not a clue.

One of our local scout masters recruits "at-risk" youth. They learn skills and get positive male role models, and many have gone onto very successful lives. Isn't that what you liberals want? I know that is what conservatives want.

johnfw wins the debate
Johnfw has absolutely crushed stormrunner with his analysis about how these debates proceed in "phases," with the last phase being a degradation into namecalling after other more-logical sounding arguments are thoroughly refuted. In fact, johnfw's last post provided the comeback answer 24 minutes before stormrunner again branded the BSA as being "discriminatory," seemingly an attempt to equate discrimination against certain BEHAVIOR with discrimination based on race or a physical handicap, discrimination that is Constitutionally prohibited.

There seems to be NO argument that BSA has an absolute right to exclude convicted/admitted murderers, rapists or child molesters (all of whom exibit aberrant and wholly-undesirable social BEHAVIOR) from membership in an organization without fear of jeopardizing their federal support. Given this reality, there is no justifcation to force the BSA to accept any individual who openly admits to aberrant sexual behavior (homosexuality), especially if that behavior, if manifested, is potentially deadly to children.

As an aside, I would hope that, before this issue goes to court, counsel present my state (Texas) governor's recently released book, "On My Honor," as supporting evidence for protecting the traditional values that lie at the core of scouting. It is important to note that ALL of the net proceeds from Governor Rick Perry's book go to the Boy Scouts of America. (For more info, go to http://www.RickPerry.org.


Curtal Friar
I love your Thursday, March, 27, 2008 9:27 AM post. When I was a child, I heard the exact same thing, almost word for word, spoken by an intelligent man whom I respected very much. The only significant difference was that he was speaking about interracial marriage. I sincerely never want to put myself between a man and his sense of morality, but such recollections give me pause. Surely, those opposed to the acceptance of homosexual relationships must come up with a better line of reasoning to offer as a basic truth.


Are you aware that the United Way has
stopped funding a small portion of the Boy Scouts budget in Connecticut. This is due to the actions of a few vocal homosexual groups.

These attacks on a private organization by militant homosexual , will continue until those that disagree with those strong arm tactic, quit giving in. One must take a stand.

One stand that we all could take, would to withdraw giving to all chapters of the United Way, until all United Way branches withdraw their anti Boy Scout stance.

Our local United Way chapter a few years ago tried the same ploy as Connecticut. A large grocery store chain, which was one of the larger contributers to the United Way stated their intentions to withdraw all future funding. If the local chapter of the United Way, pulled funding from the local Boy Scout council. The United Way backed down. They failed to realize, that the management of this large grocery store chain, was heavy into supporting the boy scouts.

My family however, stopped giving to the United Way, choosing to give our donations directly to various organizations,including the Boy Scouts.

If you want to stop the slow drip of actions against the Boy Scouts from various United Way chapters. Stop giving. Tell them why. Otherwise, the United Way will slowly but surely, attack your scout council. drip, drip, drip......

Radman
Odd choice of comparisons. Each of the things you listed are amongst the most serious civil crimes. Surly it would be a simple matter to exclude such heinous criminals. Homosexuality is not even a crime, let alone amongst the most serious. I can’t fathom how a serious person can make such a comparison.

Curtal
"Face it: homosexuality is immoral and a perversion, and it will never truly be accepted by the majority as anything less."

Do you know how I face things that I don't believe. I fight it. Consider this a fight.

AND TO BLACKWELL: don't get too carried away
with this moral straightness business. Most
biographers of Baden-Powell believe that he was
gay, even though he married late in life. Of
course, it is not out of the question that through bouts of self-hatred, he did mean to make
little boys promise to be sexually straight, if that in fact is what that line means.
When I think of those sorts of things, I am always reminded of J. Edgar Hoover. Oh, the
damage that man did, while living a lie. On the
other hand maybe he didn't live the lie, maybe
he only assumed that people accepted that he
was straight.

Anyway, I had one son in the scouts. I can assure that when he took the oath and when I heard him take the oath, neither of us knew that he was promising to be straight! What a laugh.
As it is, he is one of the straightest people I
know. There was no need to make a promise.

To Blackwell
In spite of my arguments against your theories
in your column, I do also find the Philadelphia
Council's actions outrageous.

dbz77
"So why weren't most of the priests' victims girls?"

Because the church discriminates against females.

Dottie...
...I positively relish criticism, one of the reasons I enjoy debating on these pages. To be honest the BSA excluding gays is an issue that I have no strong feelings about one way or the other and ultimately doesn't effect me. I was merely making what you accurately describe as "flip" remark based on my observations here in the UK. I'm afraid a basic tenet of life here is that the 'cool' kids do not join the Scouts. If that is unkind then I apologise again!!!

Brujo
"Why is it that homosexuals consider themselves to be an ethnic group? They want special rights because they have sex with same sex?"

What an interesting and thoughtful take on this
situation. How about rewording this just a bit.
They want the same rights as everyone else has.
Nothing special about those rights at all, except
that they are on occasion they are denied to
them.

Blackwell
I don't know about your Scout, but my Scout was
never called reverent. People have said a lot of
good things about him, but reverent just isn't one
of them.

Same old Same old!
What we have is the usual problem in America. The vocal minority has a loud voice and a case of malignant narcissim that can't be cured. My solution, internment states for liberals. Put them in states with there own ilk and let them have all the freedoms they want, abortion on demand, free love, criminals with more rights than victims, heather has 2 mommies for their kids, reduced carbon footprints, flood of illegal aliens from all over the world, disdain for the country and religion, racial division, gender division, orientation division, and a society of victims.

As I've always said, the pansy-*ss white liberal contingent is the biggest danger to this country so let's give them what they want, the 1960's. all to themselves.

MelloSJ2
But woiuld not prisests who wanted to molest girls organize things so that they would have more access to girls?

The fact is that the priests who raped boys were homosexuals; deal with it!

MellorSJ2
I guess that depends on your definition, and where you get your information. Since 90% of the victims of the priestly molestations were male, what does that say when all of the abusers were also male?

I find it telling that most of the people who denounced the label of homosexual priest (as opposed to pedophile priest) were homosexual activists. Could that be due to an agenda?
_______________________________________________

"During 1990, Rev. Thomas Crangle, a Franciscan priest in Passaic, N.J., mailed a survey to 500 randomly selected priests. Of the 398 responses, about 45% said that they were gay."

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_rcc.htm

The same report stated that, in a different survey, only 15% self-reported as being homosexual. Of course, 73% chose not to reply, so the results are meaningless.
________________________________________________

"During the current crisis, homosexual activists within and outside the Catholic Church have done everything they could to divert attention away from even the possibility that there may be a higher percentage of homosexuals among the priesthood than in the general public, and that this may be the root of the problem of child sexual molestation within the Church. It is particularly the link between homosexuality and child molestation that they seek to deny.

For example, Dignity USA kicked off its "Stop Blaming Gay Priests" campaign during the meeting of the United States Catholic Bishops Conference in Washington, D.C., November 10-13, 2002. The group said, "DigntyUSA [sic] is calling on the U.S. Catholic bishops to stop blaming gay priests for the clergy sexual abuse scandal. All credible evidence discounts any link between the molestation of children and homosexuality."1"

http://www.catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=6506 %20

JR
What will you do if your plan is enacted and you find almost everyone has opted for internment leaving you and a few million like minded citizen left with only a tiny isolated piece of the country? Just think of it. Each of you know exactly what should be done so you will all constantly agree with each other and live in a delightful microcosm of similitude. I wonder how many minutes it will take for it to break up into a million little pieces, each believing they are right and all others are wrong?

mellor
What are nuns?Male or female

Radman and MikeR
Thanks, Radman, but I failed to mention a tactic found in all three phases of the debate. If a question or comment can't be refuted or explained, ignore it. Our friend won't address certain key points. Using the word discrimination with its negative connotations is a word manipulation mind game; using it when it does not apply is disingenous. The BSA (and any other "selective membership" organization) is not "guilty" of discrimination when exercising their legal right to freedom of association.

MikeR, you misread Radman's post. He used the term BEHAVIOR in all caps, giving examples (not comparisons or value judgments) of objectionable bahaviors. An organization has a right to have a criteria or rules for membership or participation. If an organization deems a behavior objectionable it's irrelevant whether the behavior is immoral, unethical, illegal or how non-members view that behavior.

Irene Adler
"
I find it telling that most of the people who denounced the label of homosexual priest (as opposed to pedophile priest) were homosexual activists. Could that be due to an agenda?"
Of course it is due to an agenda.

The homosexual child abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church would convince people to refuse to allow homosexuals in positions where they can care for minors.

To those who claim that the priests who raped boys were as straight as arrows, I ask this question.

Did Vinson Filyaw kidnap and rape a fourteen-year-old girl because he was GAY?

The Differance
The differance between the Scouts and the City of Philadelphia is that the Scouts pledge to be honest and keep promises made.

I understand
why you would suggest that the Boy Scouts fight this. And I wholeheartedly agree.

But what makes you think the liberals/socialists care what the First Amendment says? When have liberal/socialists ever cared what the Constitution says when it gets in the way of their agenda?

Even if they go to the Supreme Court, and rule in favor of the Boy Scouts, the Philadelphia Council will find a way to punish those that don't fall in line. They care not for truth and justice. They are socialists. They care only that you tow the line - their line.

JR, I Couldn't Have Said It Better
JR has the right idea & I won't even try to better his idea because it is perfect!

viruddh
A fight, eh?

Okay, then.

Here's round one:

1st challenge to you:

Prove that homosexuality is not a perversion. I can't wait to hear your rationale and reasons (oops, I mean excuses).

JR, I Couldn't Have Said It Better
JR has the right idea. Only instead of giving the Socialist Liberals U.S.A. a couple of states in this country, put them on a large deserted island far from the coast of the U.S.A. Imagine, no Liberals. Sounds like Heaven on Earth.

Viruddh
You're not pulling a rope-a-dope, are you?

Fidel and Che rule (misunderstood heros)
Hey Ken, maybe to understand just how mean the US is to gay people here, we can put the libs on the same deserted island where the left's hero, Fidel Castro, interned all the Cubans with AIDS, benevolent, caring leader that he is. And, somehow if Che was still around, I suspect a bullet in the head would have been his answer, long before the internment. you cruel cruel America!!!!

Johnfw
I was giving Radman the benefit of doubt. If storm runner is arguing that the BSA has no right to exclude based on any “behavior” then Redman is arguing that the BSA does. And “any” behavior includes being Catholic, Jewish or any other particular religion. The key being the term, “any”. Yes, some behaviors are illegal and others are not. The BSA has the right to exclude any illegal behavior. The debate is not enhanced on either side by lumping all behaviors together. This is a common flawed tactic of those opposed to homosexuality. It will always fail. My point is not and has never been to tell those opposed that they are wrong in their beliefs, but to show flaws in their reasoning. If you want to offer legitimate opposition, you must come up with better reasoning. Otherwise, you are as wrong as those who say anything goes.


Ship the losers to Hawaii
and let the 10 or 20 normal people still living there come back the the Mainland. They've already screwed up the 50th state possibility beyond repair anyway.

-Ray

cool according to who vespanat?
In the UK exactly who decides what is "cool." What do "cool" kids do?

You also did not explain the reason you referred to the scouts as fascist.

A lovely young man whom I sponsored when he was confirmed is an Eagle Scout. He was never considered anything but cool. He is now a medic in Iraq. I wish we had more "misfits" and "social inadequates" like him.

stormrunner
You need to get an original thought, instead of just re-posting word-for-word something you said hours ago.

You just don't get it, do you?

This is not an issue about tolerance or social integration.

The city of Philadelphia entered into a permanent contract in 1928. It didn't expire. It wasn't up for renewal. They voted to violate their contract and break their word, against their legal obligations.

And why did they do it? Because the Boy Scouts have a certain viewpoint with a religious basis, and the government disapproved of how this private organization chooses to believe.

That's terrible. Government cannot tell private citizens what to believe, and threaten them with what amounts to a $200,000 a year fine if they refuse to adopt the government's approved viewpoint. That's unconstitutional. And that's what Ken Blackwell is saying.

gretsky is wrong.
Gretsky wrote "....headed by Howard ”Yee-haw“ Dean..."
No,no,no! Unfair! Dean didn't say that!

He said "Yee-haah".

Listen to the tape.

Higene
1941 !!!!

Is that the lasted data you could find.

lasted=latest
typo

higene
No. The city's action has one basis, and one only: they disapprove of BSA's religously-based speech. The lease was a continuing lease. It was not up for renewal. It was a permanent arrangement. The city is breaking its legal contractual obligation because it dislikes BSA's religiously-driven viewpoint. That makes it unconstitutional.

trog -
I stand corrected. Is ”yee-haah“ a troglodyte word?

HIGENE


what would be your response if a landlord who had signed a lease of 99 years at a fixed rate changed the terms of the lease becuse the tenant was Black or gay?

Priests
They admitted to being homosexuals (gays) but most of them actually were pederasts (a different form of perversion). Pedophiles are those who sexually "molest" (that is, coerce or force) youngsters of the opposite sex. In any case, it's despicable. Kids should NOT have to be afraid or "bothered" by male or female adults who have their own selfish "needs" uppermost. I find it hard to accept that children so young as 11 years have to know what their sexual orientation is. That should be left for at least another 5-6 years when they can decide on their own without the help of a perverted adult.

I believe that the
very same abomination occurred here in San Diego regarding the Boy Scouts and an area of Balboa Park where they have had their headquarters for a very long time.

How proud you libs must feel-

the Golden Rule
The golden rule is the ultimate moral value. It is the stuff that practical and fine moral principles can stand on.
A Scout does benefit from putting himself in another's place.
Especially someone crying out for justice. A good Scout should at least have the moral stuff to hear someone out and challenge injustice against them.

The Golden Rule goes both ways, sometimes, when you ignore injustice. The Scouts are getting as good as they give. And missing a teaching moment, indeed MANY opportunities to learn something about justice for another in this.
I wish people knew the difference between rationalizing something as opposed to being justified.
How come the Girl Scouts don't have this problem?

Backlash

All this is just backlash from the man-boy love crowd who are indigent about one of their recruiting grounds being denied them by the BSA. If these sicko's don't get their way, they play the victom card to gain the support of wacko liberals who dominate city councils everywhere. So, what is the result? Scout organizations just go to the burbs where people with an ounce of sense deny such bs and the decadence of the cities continues it's course while denying to inner city children the one organization that could make a difference in getting them out of the poverty and squaller they live in.

Philly has no honor.
Philly is playing the political bully here in hopes of getting national BSA to change it's policy on homosexuals, and the Philly BSA council is caught in the middle.


du
You're absolutely right! If people followed the Golden Rule, we would have no need for rules banning homosexuals from positions within the Scouts. If they stopped molesting innocent little boys or curious older boys, the point would be moot.

What do we want? gays in scouts!
When do we want it? TIMMY!!!

If Big Gay Al figured all this out, how come liberals can't? Super!!!!

du
Actually, the local Philly BSA council wanted to change it's policy. National said no.

Who is it that you think is crying for justice here and whose shoes should scouts be filling? Just trying to clarify your position is all.

Higene
BSA does offer Venturing which is an offshoot of the BSA program that allows girls to join around age 13 I believe. Nothing for younger girls though.

You guys are NUTS!
First, my understanding is that the Boy Scouts built the original building and refurbished it recently. So, if the City wants to take away the building, they should offer JUST recompense!

Second, do you think that Boy Scout leaders sit around teaching gay bashing? They have MUCH better things to do to grow Eagles. In fact, teaching ANYTHING about sexuality is against Scout policy. Go read the Wikipedia entry on Boy Scouts vs Dale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of_America_v._Dale . We are not teaching sex, but ARE teaching morals, mostly by example. Most Scoutmasters realize this and even hide their smoking from the boys (if they haven't given it up).

This whole situation is because Boy Scouts has a code which does not allow homosexual leaders and a bunch of busybody liberals want to screw up the Boy Scouts like they did the schools and the government. If you look at history, Boy Scouts had a MAJOR problem with predators preying on boys and revised and strengthed their code.

Finally, I want to watch you liberals come into a meeting and explain to the parents of the boys that a "gay" man is taking their sons on a campout this month. I submit 80% of the boys would not show up because of their parents. So figure out a way to educate the parents, and leave the boys alone.

Girl Scouts
Unfortunately Girl Scouts of America has such a similar name to the Boy Scouts of America.

The 2 organizations have little else in common.

For one thing, the lesbians and the Planned Parenthood bunch are taking over the Girl Scouts' national organization, whatever it is called.

Tom the Tinkerer
I think you got the right difference between the Boy Scouts and the Council there. I wonder if any of the Council were Boy Scouts.

pederast
According to my Webster's New Explorer Dictionary,

pederast - n - [Greek paiderastes, lit. lover of boys] one that practices anal intercourse esp. with a boy.

So technically that is what the priests were, but it seems a difference without a distinction. If they weren't homosexual, it wouldn't have happened.

Venturing
Venturing is a co-ed program of the Boy Scouts of America for youth between the ages of 14 and 20.

Like the rest of BSA, there are rules in place to protect the youth - and the adults.

go to http://www.scouting.org/ search on youth protection

BSA is way ahead of many organizations in protecting our youth, not only from sexual predators, but from abuse and neglect of any kind. BSA has been alert to the dangers to youth and actively working to protect them for many years now.

Girl Scouts
The Boy Scouts were sued some years ago to allow women as Scout Leaders. They agreed to do it because women (mothers) are seldom pedifiles. It still doesn't keep them from checking police records on the women. Men are excluded as leaders of the Girl Scouts - with some reason. Some men do attack girls. They have not been sued because most men agree with the same thing. I would no more allow my daughter to go camping out with a man I don't know than I would allow my son out with a homosexual that I don't know.

On the other hand, the Boy Scouts excluded homosexuals because of the number of problems (such as priests) that has come up. Many gay people are fine. Unfortunately some are not. It is the 'some' that the Boy Scouts want to keep out. Since most parents don't want to allow homosexuals access to their boys, the Boy Scouts have to lump everyone together who are gay. Tough. Live with it just as I live with the fact that I can't be a Girl Scout leader.

TheHistorian/Sir Michael
Good posts both of you.

Historian- I would have went with 90-95% not showing for camp, but that's just me.

Sir Michael: The sad part is that much of the public think the two groups are connected. I have had men tell me they in no way want their boys in Scouts if it is anyway like or related to the Girl Scouts. These same men in no way want their daughters anywhere near the Girl Scouts.

Mr. Blackwell fails to mention
that the councilman leading the fight is openly homosexual and a rabidly vocal opponent of the BSA leadership.

Good article.

Character Counts
The Scout Law:
A Scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, and Reverant.

For those uniformed, Reverant is defined as doing your religious duty and respecting the religions of others. Not a lot to argue with there. Actually, whenever I have been challenged about promoting values (who's values?) I always quote the Scout Law and ask what is objectionable in that list?

I am of the opinion that the driving force for the rules to keep homosexual men from becoming leaders has to do more with Youth Protection than anything. All leaders know that Youth Protection rules trump everything else. The Youth Protection rules are non-negiotable and the final authority on the subject. Within this safe zone, all of Scouting takes place.

It's a shame that the decent residence
of Philly, just boycott all things that pertain to the city organizations. The city has been a cesspool of bad behavior with many of their sports fans for decades. Common knowledge by all that follow the sports scene. They're so bad in Philly, that they bash their own teams. Other teams and their fans dread traveling to their venues, not knowing what type of abuse they will get.

Philly's version of love, is not the kind found in Websters.

Women Scout Leaders
I have no idea of when if ever the Boy Scouts of America were sued by women to allow them to be leaders.

I do know that more years ago than I like to think, I had a "Den Mother." When I was a Den Leader I was known to joke on occasion that I never expected to grow up to be a Den Mother. So Cub Scouts have had women leaders for many years.

Few of the leaders in Boy Scouts are women. Of the ones I can think of, most are active on the District or Council level, not on the Troop level. (The Troop Council is made of parents of both sexes. I am speaking of uniformed leaders registered as such with BSA.) Most women come to BSA by way of being the Scoutmaster's wife or some such. Few leaders arrive without a Boy Scout and that is actually a warning sign and the individual should be well scrutinized. Some few are boys that stay on to be leaders after they turn 18, but they are as I said, few. A number of leaders stay on after their sons are grown. God bless them, we need those old gray heads.

Venture Crews are co-ed and so are the leaders- this is required whenever there is a mixed bunch at an outing. I suppose if only the guys went camping, no women leaders would be requred to come, but I haven't seen that yet. The girls in the Crew seem to be if anything more interested in outdoor activities than the guys.

In all cases Youth Protection rules apply, with seperate sleeping and appropriate bathroom facility rules. The only youth a leader is allowed to tent with is the leader's child and this is pretty much limited to Cub Scouting. My wife could share my tent if I could get her to come but other than that, no co-ed tenting is allowed.

Sir Michael:
You are right about the Scouts. I can tell you are a member. The Boy Scouts were sued about 15 years ago and decided to let women be leaders since they were mothers of the boys and because there had been little if any problem with women den leaders.

I remember the Scout Leader of the Troop my boys were with came into work the day after the decision. A woman in his office, active with the Girl Scouts, made a big thing about it, saying she was going to sign up immediately. He agreed - and stated he was going to sign up as a Girl Scout leader as well. She almost came unglued.

Scouts and Religion
This entire argument is not about religion. Scouting leaves religion to the boys and really doesn't care what religion you belong to as long as you try to live by it. All religious training is done by the boy's pastor or whatever you want to call him.

The homosexuals bring religion up every time because they don't want to face the real reason the Boy Scout program does not allow them to be leaders. That is for protection of the boys. Accept it. I would no more expect parents to send their daughter with me out overnight as I would expect them to send a boy out with a gay leader. I don't blame them and therefore don't try to force them due to political correctness to do it. Any parent who does send his or her child out due to political correctness instead of worrying about their child's safety shouldn't have children. If you are gay, find another avenue to display your love of children but don't expect to force people to let you go camping alone with their sons (or daughters) by trying to make them feel guilty due to political correctness or by getting some court to deprive them of something like money or facilities.

Female leaders have special jobs
in Scouting as well. Some take charge of entire troops of developmentally challenged boys. Seems the kids respond better to a maternal figure than to men sometimes.

The Explorers are a branch of the BSA and have always been co-ed. They are vocationally oriented and usually sponsored by a Coast Guard station, Firehouse or Police Precinct.

-Ray

45caliber - oh stop it
"...The homosexuals bring religion up every time because they don't want to face the real reason the Boy Scout program does not allow them to be leaders. That is for protection of the boys."

Most pedophiles are hetro. It has little or nothing to do with gay/straight I am told. I am also told gays don't like boys because they are far to "female" looking LOL. I know little about the subject except personal experience my troop had its share of "bacholer" gentleman and no one cared or commented. Gay scouts? Yup we had them too. The bottomline is: here you fundamentalist conservatives go again failing to own up for damages you have caused. The BSA was a tremendous asset to the nation and its youth until you guys made it extremist



MikeR, part 1
I'm sorry, sir, it's difficult to "come up with better reasoning" for someone who has difficulty understanding the term "behavior." It simply means actions, stuff you do. One of us does suffer from faulty reasoning because I do not see how in the world you can say "behavior includes being Catholic, Jewish." Behavior is actions; Catholic, etc. are beliefs. How the heck did religion enter the picture? Right. That's another tactic I left out of my scenario of debates such as this. If all else fails, attack religious belief. Why? Do religions make you feel guilty? Gays who are comfortable with who they are should have no reason to feel guilty and should not attack people of faith. My gay friends and associates are "no worries" types and have no interest in the gay activist agenda. They are also very happy folks, and not angry at anyone.

You said: "If storm runner is arguing that the BSA has no right to exclude based on any “behavior” then Redman (sic) is arguing that the BSA does."

Stormrunner is wrong; Radman is correct. Why do you require reason from discussants when basic comprehension is lacking on your part. Let me repeat: It is legal (Supreme Court ruling) for an organization to practice "freedom of association." Neither you nor stormie seem to understand that. It is also legal (and necessary) to provide members who will associate with criteria, creed, rules, guidelines, etc. for the organization to function in accord with its mission.


MikeR, part 2
The Supreme Court, for once, got this one right. To do otherwise would invite chaos and, indeed, anarchy and violence. Imagine if extremist gay bashers (with guns!) were allowed to associate with the members of HRC, GLSEN, or any gay support group. What about a feminist group meeting with some male chauvinist piggies in attendance? How about a pro-life group with members from Planned Parenthood?

You wrote: "some behaviors are illegal and others are not. The BSA has the right to exclude any illegal behavior." Again, that is incorrect; the BSA and any other organization has the right to exclude those whose beliefs or behavior are not in accord with the creed of the organization. Whether a behavior is immoral, unethical, illegal or not is irrelevant. Any non-members perception of the behavior is irrelevant.

You wrote: "The debate is not enhanced on either side by lumping all behaviors together." Neither Radman nor I lumped them together. You did (don't remember if stormie did). Radman listed illustrative examples, no more no less, no "lumping," comparing, contrasting, nor judging individual merits of the examples.


MikeR, part 3
You wrote: "This (lumping) is a common flawed tactic of those opposed to homosexuality. It will always fail." Since this was not the tactic, this point is invalid. I have not expressed any opposition to homosexuality. In reality, one cannot "oppose" homosexuality--it is; people can't even "oppose" gays (except in a physical struggle, perhaps); one can only oppose the beliefs and/or acts (behavior, lifestyle). I'm not opposed to these but I do have an opinion (based on natural law) which I need not share because it's not pertinent to this discussion. (Besides, my opinions are usually pretty worthless!)

On this thread I've merely presented a paradigm of debates on the topic. Second, I've expressed that I deplore the Philly city council for their illegal, intolerant, biased, and bigoted action against the BSA, and I would feel the same if they did this against any benevolent organization (straight or gay, religious or non, etc.).

Again, I'm sorry if my poor reasoning is inadequate to explain what the BSA is legally entitled to do.

johnfw/MikeR
"...The Supreme Court, for once, got this one right. To do otherwise would invite chaos and, indeed, anarchy and violence."

Yes they did and I thought you of all people would want no assistance given them at all by the state and taxpayer. Why change that for an extremist youth group?

johnfw/MikeR
"..Second, I've expressed that I deplore the Philly city council for their illegal, intolerant, biased, and bigoted action against the BSA, and I would feel the same if they did this against any benevolent organization (straight or gay, religious or non, etc.). "

Ahh see here is your classic error and a nice try to sneak it in like Rush's "phony soldier". The BSA are no longer a "benevolent organization".

I don't buy it
I am sick of hearing that men who molest boys are "hetero." At best they are bi-sexual. The attraction to a male is not a heterosexual behavior. You can talk to me about deviants all day long, and those who prey on children are most definitely the most deviant of the deviant. I am just not convinced they are heterosexuals. Perhaps they are latent homosexuals.

At any rate, the Boy Scouts have the right to reject whomever they want as leaders. I was a Cub Scout Den Mother along with another mom. When the boys became Boy Scouts, I convinced her that we needed to step aside so the boys could have a male leader. Boys benefit when they have strong men in their lives who are not related to them (club leaders, coaches, teachers, etc). Most parents prefer that those men be straight. If that offends some people, that is just too bad.

Dottie
"..I am just not convinced they are heterosexuals. Perhaps they are latent homosexuals."

heck if I know that is what the science folks say

"At any rate, the Boy Scouts have the right to reject whomever they want as leaders."

Yes they do but the do not have the right to any public assistance

" Most parents prefer that those men be straight. If that offends some people, that is just too bad. "

no problem here just do not ask for assistance or funds

Hal Donahue
Your description of BSA as extremist and no longer a benevolent organization is merely your opinion and one that is not supported by evidence or facts. Furthermore, your comments are biased, bigoted, intolerant and not very inclusive.

By the way, the BSA is not supported by the state and taxpayers (read all previous posts instead of picking and choosing the ones you want to slam). Previous posts also point out the miscontruction of your pedestrian comment: "most pedophiles are hetero."

While gay is okay, gay activists are extremists, even more so than the "fundamentalist conservatives" you mentioned. Never heard of that anyway; do you mean fundamentalist Christians? Some of them can be extremists.

A deal no one can refuse: let's ship both groups of belligerent extremists to San Francisco (or wherever) and then plain ole regular Christians and plain ole regular gays can just get on with their lives.

johnfw
"..Your description of BSA as extremist and no longer a benevolent organization is merely your opinion and one that is not supported by evidence or facts. Furthermore, your comments are biased, bigoted, intolerant and not very inclusive."

Hmmm sorry the facts and court cases do point out that they are a "biased, bigoted, intolerant and not very inclusive" group. Extremist is perhaps too strong a word only in that socialist and communist are too strong words as used here.

"By the way, the BSA is not supported by the state and taxpayers (read all previous posts instead of picking and choosing the ones you want to slam). "

If they get preferential rent yes they are. The national Jamboree etc is on military land and supported by the military

"Previous posts also point out the miscontruction of your pedestrian comment: "most pedophiles are hetero."

Not my fight but I will go with the experts

"While gay is okay, gay activists are extremists, even more so than the "fundamentalist conservatives" you mentioned."

Oh no equally with...

"A deal no one can refuse: let's ship both groups of belligerent extremists to San Francisco (or wherever) and then plain ole regular Christians and plain ole regular gays can just get on with their lives. "

Nah just stay out of everyone lives not too much to ask is it?

well this eagle scout must run
Be well and enjoy

Curtal
Heck, if I wanted a dope I would rope me one.
But it just so happens I don't want one.

Say hi to Cassius for me.

Uhmmm, Hal...
Bias is good. Use your dictionary.

It's prejudice that is more likely a problem in most cultural relationships. Bias and prejudice are not synonyms, although the newest dictionaries indicate that they are because of current linguistic trends. Gay doesn't mean homosexual either, although it is accepted to today. Both terms, bias and gay, have been perverted by liberal perverts. I'm pretty sure we are in agreement on the meaning of that word, though.

Another thing Hal, although you are correct in your claim that most child molestations are perpetrated by heterosexuals (numerically), you fail to point out that even though only 1 to 2 percent of the population is homo, that 32 percent of the molestations come from that 1 to 2 percent. It can be researched easily on the Internet.

Homos are a far greater danger to the welfare of children than normal people. That's the truth of the matter.






FROG wrote:
"Dont' get me wrong. I believe that individuals who do so lose out and fail to gain perspectives that could strengthen and enrich their lives. For what it's worth, I wouldn't trust ANY man with an overnight trip with my son unless I knew him VERY well. You never know what secrets people hide, and, as Irene Adler pointed out above, it just is not prudent for parents to sacrifice their children on the alter of political correctness."

How right you are! Gays don't care about our kids, only advancing their agenda. To be fair to gays, I'd have to say this attitude (about our kids) isn't attributed only to gays, but pretty much to the entire liberal agenda.

johnfw
I fully understand the meaning of behavior and it is the nature of behavior that I am addressing. And yes, our religious practices are a behavior we choose to do. I am not attacking religion nor am I harboring any guilty feelings about being a Catholic. For that matter, I am not angry with anyone. That is why I don’t engage in heated discourse. Rather it is you who is hiding the deeper intent of your words.

You say, “BSA and any other organization has the right to exclude those whose beliefs or behavior are not in accord with the creed of the organization.” that means you believe the BSA can exclude Catholics if they decide Catholicism is not in accord with the creed of the organization. If it’s a matter of religion, then let us pick another benign behavior, say vegetarianism or being a sports enthusiast. Why can’t you come out and say that football fans can no longer be scout master if the organization says so.

Of course, there is a grain of truth to your reasoning, but such arbitrary exclusion comes at a sacrifice to public services. And that is the heart of the matter.

I do not like how the City of Philadelphia handled the affair. I was course. On the other hand, I recall one of the earliest situation where a man from New Jersey was excluded. He was an Eagle Scout with bronze and silver palms. That mean his behavior far exceeded the highest level of scouting, yet that was not good enough. You see, behavior is really at the bottom of this debate. What exactly is the BSA trying to do? It is supposed to be providing boys with a character shaping experience and helping them to develop into good men. No one is opposed to that mission.


johnfw
You say you are not opposed to homosexuals. Then why can’t homosexuals be scout leaders?

As for lumping, my original comment that listing such behaviors was an odd type of comparison. What purpose did it serve other than to equate homosexuality with murderers, rapists or child molesters. My response was that the BSA has every right to exclude such people base upon their criminal behavior but that the argument does not apply to homosexuals as that is not criminal.


What we really have here is the fact that many people don’t like homosexuals and don’t need a reason. Dottie provides a good example of that in her comment “Most parents prefer that those men be straight. If that offends some people, that is just too bad.” When I was a child, that same comment would have been made about a black man trying to be a scout master of a white troop (we were segregated back then). The sentiment must apply to either both or neither. You tell me.



Science and sodomy…

Here is a question for those who say that science has proven the existence of a sodomy gene. Let’s call it the S_gene. If what you say is true then this behavior should be considered natural and not a choice that bears personal responsibility. Therefore, those who hold to Biblical morality are wrong; the Biblical testimony is false. Christ died needlessly. We are all lost in our sin. If there is no redemption for the sodomite, then there is no redemption for anyone.

So what does your science say about propagating the S_gene? What is there in nature to prompt such a gene to develop? Given that it did develop, what is there in nature to prevent it from extinction? The godless science to which you appeal to justify this behavior says the S_gene has no reason to exist.

So which is it? How does your science find a gene that science says can’t possibly exist? Genes do not propagate through dead in genetic paths.

Now there is a relationship between naturalism and sodomy, but not the one you think. The language of Romans 1 is explicit and unambiguous…

They did not like to retain God in their knowledge so God have them over to their lusts; first to immorality, then perversion and then to reprobation unless you repent and believe the gospel…

‘Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God’ [1 Corinthians 6:9-10].

PHL City Attorney trounces

Making Philadelphia’s decision all the more outrageous is the fact that the Boy Scouts built their 3-story headquarters building with their own privately donated money and gave it to the City in 1928. The Scouts’ lease was “in perpetuity” for which they paid the City $1 per year.

Why should the Boy Scouts have to pay twice for their own building?

I understand the City Attorney of Philadelphia decided to break this perpetual lease.

From World Net Daily’s report: “’If I do not receive an executed lease, signed by the Boy Scouts, to remain as tenants paying a fair market rent, we will begin looking for alternative tenants that can take over the property June 1, 2008,’ Romulo Diaz, the city solicitor, said earlier. He, according to Philadelphia media reports, is an open homosexual.”
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59021

Regarding the fundamental right of assocation, the Boy Scouts is a faith-based organization. Five years ago there was a situation where a young man said he didn’t believe in God but he was already a leader of other young men. He was opposed to a basic principle of the Boy Scouts so therefore it was appropriate for the organization to ask him to leave. He was given a week's grace period to determine if he really meant what he said about not believing in God. He wasn't simply told to "get out!" like so many news organizations reported at that time. It had been the media's reporting that has been blunt and harsh, characterizing unfairly this excellent organization, not the spokesman for the Boy Scouts.

Whille it was difficult for the boy, the integrity of the Boy Scouts organization matters also. The working world is full of quandaries like this. When one vocally expresses opinions contrary to an organization's mission, one can't expect those in the upper echelon to continually overlook it. The young man was a designated leader, and the organization had a right to expect its leadership follow its mission.



BummyRunner and BuggerMevespanet
You sound angry that you were not afforded the opportunity to GET molested by Boy scout leaders.

Irene, I get it, OK!!!!!! Actually I respect your apparent knowledge of this situation. You seem well informed on this topic.

As an aside, My father, a petroleum geologist, was one of my scoutmasters, until he gave a speech saying that within our lifetimes we would be paying more that $3.00 for a gallon of gas...they kicked him out, and I quit the scouts.

MikeR 1
"I am not angry with anyone. That is why I don’t engage in heated discourse." Maybe not but you are certainly willing to sling arrows; you insulted my reason (or lack thereof) three times in your previous post.

"Rather it is you who is hiding the deeper intent of your words." What would that be, pray tell? I think my comments have been amply explicit.

"you believe the BSA can exclude Catholics ... vegetarianism ... a sports enthusiast." You know my "deeper intent" and now you know what I believe. Amazing. What I have stated about this issue is not what I believe about the BSA but what I know to be their legal right because the Supreme Court says so. You should be demeaning the Justices for their lack of reason instead of me for mine. Your hypotheticals of
excluding Catholics, vegetarians, and sports fans are really weak.


MikeR 2
Since you employ hypotheticals may I include one? Suppose there's a group called Body as Temple and the adult leaders teach tweens and teens to respect their bodies--no tatoos, no cutting, etc. Cutting or body mutilation is considered deleterious behavior by the BAT club but a cutter considers it oki doki. A cutter becomes a group leader and takes the kids on an outing. Some kids, whether encouraged by the cutter/leader or simply modeling the behavior of an adult role model, give it a try. I think the parents would be upset about that.

I know what your reaction is just as you know what I believe. Guess we both have ESP. Your response: you assume that all cutters would behave this way (encourage the behavior or allow it to happen). No, not at all. But the parents would be correct in assuming that there is more potential for it to happen with a cutter/leader than with a non-cutter/leader.

Switching to the issue of gay leaders in the Scouts and continuing with the assumption, the statistics cited several times in previous posts are revealing. With 3% gay population over 30% of child molestations are adult males against male children while among the 97% hetero population over 60% are adult males against female children. In terms of risk to children being involved in what many parents consider destructive behavior, the assumptive possibility is obviously much greater in the gay with boys group than hetero with girls group.

Most responsible parents would not consider either an appropriate situation.

MikeR 3
"Of course, there is a grain of truth to your reasoning, but such arbitrary exclusion comes at a sacrifice to public services. And that is the heart of the matter." So now my reasoning has a whole grain of truth. You flatter me. Could you be any more condescending? It's not an arbitrary exlusion; it is a rational, reasonable, logical, fair, and safe exclusion--not to mention that is again, legal. My comments above should make that clear but I expect not to you. Your mind is made up and set in stone. Maybe you can get the Supreme Court, every major religion in the world, thousands of experts, the vast majority of the American population to throw their feeble reasoning out the window and adopt your much more considered worldview. You want to sacrifice public services to 97% of the population so that 3% are included? That sounds fair.

"You say you are not opposed to homosexuals. Then why can’t homosexuals be scout leaders?" Because I'm not the Grand Vizer of the Scouts. Seriously, though, I think I answered that above, unless of course my reasoning is again faulty.

"What we really have here is the fact that many people don’t like homosexuals and don’t need a reason." That's true but lots of groups don't like lots of other groups. Why let it bother you? No one will change your thinking and you won't change theirs.


MikeR 4
"...same comment would have been made about a black man trying to be a scout master of a white troop (we were segregated back then). The sentiment must apply to either both or neither. You tell me." Not comparable. One has to do with race, the other with lifestyle, sexual preference and activity, and behavior. Racial discrimination is addressed by civil rights. Gay sexual acts are a personal freedom, not a civil right. The rights of gays as citizens are included in civil and constitutional rights. There is no constitutional, civil, or societal right to inclusion in every single activity, organization, element, aspect of society. In fact, the legal right of "freedom of association" allows certain exclusions in some situations. We all can't be included in everything. Most of the 97% just deal with it.


Dear Mr. Blackwell
Kudos on an evenhanded, well thought out and morally based article. I've seen a lot of good, thoughtful comments that well express what I believe captures the heart and soul of our nation's core values... something which the Boy Scouts have long been the standard bearers of. This incident in Philadelphia is not the first time in recent history that the BSA has come under attack for its moral steadfastness. (Who can forget the humiliation of the Boy Scout color guard at the 2000 Democrat National Convention?) It won't be the last, either. At least, unlike their "sister" organization, they have not faltered under the pressure of the amoral left.

The only mention I can make in accordance with so many other excellent posts is this: What the left would have the Boy Scouts submit to is sheer insanity! One quite simply does NOT place children in the care and under the authority of sexual deviants. In body, heart and soul, today's children are in such danger already that would have been inconceivable a half century ago. The acceptance by some of overt perversity (and all its historically attendant consequences) is a major reason why. Its existance as a political force that can trump all civilized standards of decency is another. Its sponsorship by a major political party raises it all to the point of incredulousness.

Continued

Dear Mr. Blackwell
Continued

Organizations like the Boy Scouts must never be taken for granted. Where high standards of ethics and decency exist, they must be vigorously upheld by a moral citizenry. Especially now, since such standards inevitably bring down the wrath of powerful liberal elements. For children's organizations, in particular, this is absolutely vital.

Isn't it ironic that the very same people who rail against Christianity with the chant of "pedophile priests" are those who would institutionalize those same kinds of deviants as scoutmasters? As I've often said of the left, their watchword is, "No lie too big. No hypocrisy too great.". To that I might well add, "No depravity (with children) too lauded.".

johnfw
Actually, my initial comment was not to you. It didn’t even refer to you. It was about Radman’s examples of behavior. Instead, it was you who impugned my reasoning rather than the other way around. I explained myself and then you claimed I didn’t understand the meaning of the word “behavior” and was attacking religious beliefs. I’ve done nothing of the sort.

When I referred to deeper meaning, I was not talking about your thoughts. I was talking about your choice of words. That meaning was confirmed by your comment “BSA and any other organization has the right to exclude those whose beliefs or behavior are not in accord with the creed of the organization.” My hypothetical are weak, but the point is that they conform with the opinion you expressed. Now the BSA either has the right to exclude or they don’t. You claim they do.

Now let us examine you hypothetical. A group such as “The Body as Temple” would have the right to exclude a cutter because cutting is explicitly contrary to the basis of the organization. There is no contradiction here because homosexuality is not expressly contrary to the scout oath or the scout law. It is here we find the heart of the debate.

My mind is not is not set in stone and neither it that of the American public. When I was in the BSA, it was a segregated troop. But why not? I attended a segregated school. It was the law of the land back then and was widely supported throughout the country. Now such things are considered reprehensible by the BSA and much of the population.

Yes, gay sexual acts are a personal freedom, not a civil right. Civil rights become involved only when being a homosexual precludes one from civil participation.


Questions for Homosexuals
Several homosexuals have argued that the Boy Scouts is a "bigoted" organization that should be punished by the Philadelphia City Council for not accepting gay scoutmasters. These homosexuals portray themselves as defenders of justice and tolerance.

I'd like to pose a couple of questions for them.

1. GLAAD does not permit heterosexuals to lead that gay rights organization. Isn’t that discrimination? If not, then why can't the Boy Scouts of America exclude homosexuals from being scoutmasters?

2. Why are gay rights groups silent about racism in the White homosexuals? Whether it’s White gay activists hurling hateful slurs at presidential candidate Barack Obama when he attended a gospel concert:

http://bookerrising.blogspot.com/2007/10/obama-under-fire-f or-gospel-tour-with.html

http://whataboutourdaughters.blogspot.com/2007/10/white-pro gressive-blogosphere-takes-aim.html

http://whataboutourdaughters.blogspot.com/2007/10/comment-o n-podcast.html

Or White homosexuals supporting racist minstrel plays starring Charles Knipp, a.k.a Shirley Q. Liquor:

http://banshirleyqliquor.typepad.com/my_weblog/

(Sidebar: Question 2 partly explains why many Black people, including Democrats, oppose gay marriage.)

The bottom line is that gay people can't claim to be opposed to bigotry when they condone it. That's the height of hypocrisy.


Fred...
First of all, GLAAD is not closed to straight people. No straight people have an interest in leadership positions. There's a difference between banning someone outright, and a person not competing for a position.

I am a straight member of the GLAAD theater jury. I was nominated in and I've held the position for over four years. I am the ONLY one who has committed to the requirements and I've been the ONLY one interested.

And gay rights groups are NOT silent about the racial divide among gay people. There is definitely a strong adjustment being made on that score and Barack Obama hasn't exactly committed to gay citizens as much as he appears to on illegal aliens. There isn't a much of a racial divide as I'm sure you'd like to think there is.
As for the S. Q. L issue, it's being discussed over at http://www.independentgayforum.com

And in general the gay media does address these cracks in support of ANY performers that are gay and those who are not and certainly the gay community supports performers of color.
Charles Knipp is a minor player, but it bears discussion that a WHITE man that does stereotype a black woman in his act is important, rather than an outright ban.
Don't blow the in house problems among gay people out of proportion. These issues you brought up are not civil laws and public policy ones-and THAT'S when the straight world shows IT'S hypocrisy.

cont..
How effectively CAN a straight person lead GLAAD, do you think Fred?
Certainly HRC has engaged straight AND gay persons to address legal and civil issues that effect both.
What straight people can you name that have WANTED to, Fred?
Is there a straight person that applied for higher levels of office and got turned down? Who was that?
NAME THEM.

The BSA is assuming that a gay scout or scoutmaster or atheist is automatically a person who is immoral and can offer NOTHING of merit to society.
I personally know several gay Eagle Scouts, one of whom served in Iraq.
That is THE utmost of courage, to serve a country and risk yourself for the rights of others who feel no obligation to reciprocate. Does the moral values of the Scouts answer that?
No.
Moral values are about the bravery and compassion within a young person and gay boys have LOADS of that.
So do atheists. They commit to social good WITHOUT as many benefits, and THAT is something important in measuring one's actions that have NOTHING to do with sex or orientation.
Straight boys don't get judged that way.
And Scouts need to learn what equality and justice means too. Apparently their moral values fail them in that.
Men can have gay brothers and be in Scouts together with them. Gay boys AND atheists have the same potential to do great good, so you tell ME, why discriminate against them when so much good can be by them?
BTW, I am a proud, contributing member of Scouting For All, founded by the Cozza family. As compassionate and committed Catholics I've ever seen in my life.

why doesn't the GSA
have these problems. I know that lesbians serve in the GSA.
So why don't the Girl Scouts have such issues?
Not as important an organization? I was a Girl Scout, so was my sister.
And I contribute to the GSA every year as well.

The bigger question is why do straight people work SO HARD at complicating the lives of gay people, starting in childhood?
And then turn around an point a finger when a gay life IS either extremely complicated or destroyed?
Banning gay boys or boys from atheist families looks more like spite, than practical or beneficial to ANYONE.

What benefit does BSA derive from these bans?
You went on a tangent about what you think is gay hypocrisy, but it looks like the BSA is capable of it.
They pled to being a private organization, that could maintain PUBLIC benefit.
That's having it both ways. And hurting gay boys and atheists isn't setting a good example either.

Unbelivable
The propensity of people to ignore the issue and go off on a tangent rant amazes me every time I read an article whether it is posted on a conservative of liberal site.

Most of you have managed to completely ignore the real issue and chose instead to argue about homosexuality and morals.

The fact of the matter is that the City is in breach of contract. Period.

The city owns the land that the building sits on. The Scouts built the building using money that was donated to them and continue to maintain the building using their own funds.

Both parties signed a lease that lasts for eternity in the amount of $1 for the land. If taxpayers dollars are being spent to maintain the land or pay utilities in contrary to their discrimination policies that is a problem for the City and not the BSA and does not allow the City to breach their contract with the BSA.

This is where this arguement ends.

The fact that the BSA excludes openly gay people is a separate arguement and while it may need to be discussed, the City trying to bully a private organization goes beyond despicable. If the BSA is forced to leave, they should be allowed to take their building with them.

Fred
GLAAD has many heterosexual members and some in leadership position especially on college campuses.

Otherwise, no one should stay silent in the face of racism. I have not seen anything which suggests that it is the policy of GLAAD to take a passive view on racism. Unfortunately, homosexuals are people too and filled with human flaws including racism. In a way though, that shows that homosexuals are just like everyone else and therefore shouldn’t be precluded from any aspect of civic participation.

Storm, get informed
stormrunner writes: Thursday, March, 27, 2008 4:48 AM
How Ironic Mr. Blackwell
Since when are facts, fairness, and reason not conservative policies? Mr. Blackwell talks all around the issue but it is clear that he wants to discriminate against gay men and boys who would be scouts or scout leaders, not based on facts or reason but based on his individual bias against this class of citizens.///WE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT IS THAT YOU THINK THAT BLACKWELL 'WANTS TO DISCRIMINATE' AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS, BY EXCLUDING THEM FROM PARTICIPATING IN ACTIVITIES THAT PUT THEM CLOSE TO THEIR CANDY? JUST AS THE SUPREME COURT SAID THE BSA COULD????\\\

How ironic. How sad, that so many blacks, while still attempting social integration themselves long after legal integration, will voice support for a policy of the Boy Scouts of America that is so unfair.///HOW IS IT UNFAIR IF THE SUPREME COURT SAID IT WAS FAIR?\\\

Today science and medicine conclude that homosexuality is not a moral choice but is a state of being.///THERE IS NO SUCH CONCLUSION BY SCIENCE AND MEDICINE.\\\ Enlightened counties, states, and individuals have reached this conclusion as well///ENLIGHTENED COUNTRIES, OR DECADENT COUNTRIES? WHICH STATES DO YOU MEAN? STATES OF THE UNITED STATES?? WHICH?\\\ – Mr. Blackwell broadcasts a sad commentary on the residual ignorance on this subject and his words only give bigots ammunition to stigmatize and marginalize a segment of our population solely due to their sexual orientation.

THE STERILITY OF HOMOSEXUALITY, THE FRUSTRATION OF HOMOSEXUAL 'SEX' NOT PRODUCING BABIES, THE DISEASE SPREADING OF HOMOSEXUALITY, THE SHORTENED LIFE EXPECTANCY OF HOMOSEXUALS SAY IT ALL ABOUT THE LEGITIMACY OF HOMOSEXUALITY.

NOTHING FAVORS HOMOSEXUALITY, NOTHING RECOMMENDS IT.

Here's a Novel Thought....
Why don't the objectors/detactors to the traditional BSA simply form their own organization? They might call it; The Gay and Amoral Scouts; acronym--- (you got it) GAAS!

Then, since the proponents don't appear to have much respect for the manner in which our country is set up, they could take this organization with them, along with all the other non-patriotic values they espound to that far away island in the South Pacific I mentioned in a previous comment.

Luis
Homosexuals are not sterile.
Homosexuals are not frustrated because homosexual encounters do not produce children.
Homosexuals do not spread disease.
Homosexuals do not have a shortened life expectancy.

Your claims are lies, Luis.
You are a liar.
You have never provided a single shred of support for any of you claims

MikeR
Since you're calling Luis a liar, I demand that you back up your claims.

Let's keep it simple:

1. What is the life expectancy of a heterosexual man?

2. What is the life expectancy of a homosexual man?

I don't know those answers. But I'm also not calling anyone a liar. Since you are calling names, let's see you provide the information. Make sure you cite to a source that we can all verify, as well. Don't just cite a fortune cookie, or something.

NPA
No, that is not how it works. Luis comes to these threads and repeats the same outrageous claims an has never offered any support for them. When questioned, he makes an excuse or moves on to another outrageous claim. I and some others have made it clear that we will not accept any of his statements at face value. He must provide proof.

Besides, in a debate, it is the one who makes the claim that has to provide the support. It is not the job of the opposition to disprove a claim. Consider if I claimed that pigs can fly but instead of offering any support, I tell you that you have to prove that pigs can’t fly for me to be wrong.

Luis is has been through every angle of this debate in previous threads. He is deliberately spreading falsehoods. That make him a liar.

SavethePhillyScouts.org
If you support the Philadelphia Scouts, head on over to savethephillyscouts.org and sign the online petition.

MikeR
No, you are the one who is mistaken. I debate for a living.

The burden was on Luis. If you had demanded Luis to provide evidentiary support, then he would have to do so.

However, you did not question his assertion and demand support. Instead, you denied his assertion.

In doing so, now you are the one with an assertion on the table. Now you bear the burden of supporting your assertion. So now you must provide evidence to support it. Professional debate would have required you to demand proof. Instead, you simply called him a liar.

So I repeat my demand--you've called him a liar--you say his assertion is untrue. Thus you have asserted that there is not difference in life expectancy between heterosexuals and homosexuals.

I demand that you provide support for your assertion, or concede that you have no proof and don't have the foggiest idea which one of you is telling the truth.

NPA
Ok, you got me. I now officially retract that statement and apologies for it. I cannot say for certain that Luis is a liar because I have no proof of such activity. Furthermore, it is wrong of me to make such accusations and impugn Luis’s well established charac