In response to:

Scouts Flirt with Dishonor and Destruction

M444ss Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:31 PM
BSA is a private organization. As such, the directors of the BSA’s national council are free to ban or allow gays. On the other hand, it is a supreme act of cowardice to put the decision on local councils and troops. By doing so, they pretend to take the high road and will claim to have moved out of the stone age by accommodating gays. Meanwhile, they know full well they will subject parents at the local level to protests, harassment and threats from whichever side doesn't agree with local decisions. If they want to allow gays to join Boy Scout troops, then they should make the decision to do so. They should not pretend to make a decision by passing the buck to thousands of parents across the nation
David3036 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 4:28 AM
It is not really a matter of "allowing gays to join" the Boy Scouts, but of not expelling kids who are already Scouts -- or denying them badge they've earned, as in the case of Ryan Andresen, who has been in the news lately because he was refused the Eagle Scout badge he earned.

Kids start in scouting as early as the second grade, when they know little about sexuality or about their own orientation. By the time they reach puberty and begin to sense that they're "different," they've been in it for years. They should not be required to stay closeted to remain in the Boy Scouts. What they did to Andresen and what they've done to MANY other kids like him is cruel, and a terrible lesson for all boys.
Searlas Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 9:32 AM
Bullying of any kind is bad, and boys who are singled out for abuse because they are weak or (seemingly) effeminate deserve sympathy. But that doesn't mean that overt sexual conduct of *any* kind should be permitted among unmarried adolescents. What should be done in the case of an Eagle-Scout candidate who gets his girlfriend pregnant, panics, talks her into aborting their unborn child, and then deeply regrets it? I don't know...The kid who admits that he experiences same-sex attraction but is trying to deal with it? I'd say: Give him a break. But homosexual lobby's agenda is quite different. It is: "'Morally straight'? Forget it!" *That's* what the debate is really about, and the future of the Boy Scouts now depends on the outcome.
du2 Wrote: Feb 07, 2013 1:17 PM
Didn't you not just read what David just said? Many boys have already been in the Scouts for half their lives by the time they are aware of their orientation. And it WOULD be cruel to out them, or ban them after they've spent all that time participating. And doing so at a very crucial point in their lives whether gay or not, to LEARN the truth about what homosexuality actually is and not to be afraid or hostile to gay people. A learning opportunity would be lost. That is unnecessary and tragic. Is the BSA supposed to be cruel, and spiteful and cowardly? These are values?

Boy Scouts learn to start fires by rubbing two sticks together. Now, the national Scout leadership is playing with fire. Scratch that; they’re playing with explosives.

Under consideration for a vote during a Feb. 4th to 6th board of directors meeting is a rules change that would overturn the Scouts’ ban on openly homosexual members and leaders.

A press release on Jan. 28 by Scouts spokesman Deron Smith said, “This would mean there would no longer be any national policy regarding sexual orientation, but that the chartered organizations that oversee and deliver Scouting would accept membership and select leaders consistent with...