What would have to change if gays were allowed in?

[BadenP 93]

Ok NJ simply put so even you will understand, the BSA can not have its cake and eat it too, they have to be consistent across the board either homsexuality is against the principles of the scouts or it isn't. What kind of message does it send to have both hetero and homo sexual only units within the same organization. It either is allowable nationally or not allowed nationally, otherwise the BSA would be nothing more than hypocrites.

 

With the majority of scouting units sponsored today by churchs or church groups I think it is a pretty safe prediction that if the BSA allowed homosexuals there would be a mass exodus by those units, it just makes common sense. Clear enough for you now NJ?

[HiLo 10]

"With the majority of scouting units sponsored today by churchs or church groups...."

 

Is that really true for the USA? If so, it explains a lot. It's certainly not true in Australia. Can't really speak for other countries, but from readings and web conversations, I doubt if it's true in the UK, where Scouting began.

 

Doesn't it really mean that you're running church youth groups with a lean towards Scouting ideas, rather than running Scouting?

 

I know this post could read as a little confrontational, and I really don't want to offend anyone, but those last few posts discussing the huge influence of conservative Christians on Scouting in the USA were a bit of a surprise to me. Do the Christian church connected Scouting units accept members from other religions, or even from other denominations?

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

vol_scouter writes:

Please take the time to read the article, the sodomy was performed with a broomstick.

 

Yeah. So? Lots of rapes are committed using objects.

 

So using GaHillBilly's bizarre reasoning, Justin Volpe must be gay.

[Mr. Boyce 13]

There is a great deal of work, and money, tied up in promoting the idea that homosexuality is the equivalent of heterosexuality.

 

. . . if only life was that easy!

 

Everything I've read and studied on the issue points to homosexuality as a very different kind of phenomenon. I encourage everybody hear to read on the subject and work past the superficial political blather you hear on TV.

[HiLo 10]

I find that a somewhat insulting post. It's deliberately vague, apart from slandering all those with different opinions for having built there opinions from the "superficial political blather you hear on TV". Sorry, in my case at least, and I'm sure many others, you're just plain wrong there.

 

I think you need to give a bit more detail about how I've been misled.

 

And perhaps tell exactly what I should be reading.

[WAKWIB 107]

"I know this post could read as a little confrontational, and I really don't want to offend anyone, but those last few posts discussing the huge influence of conservative Christians on Scouting in the USA were a bit of a surprise to me. Do the Christian church connected Scouting units accept members from other religions, or even from other denominations?"

For HiLo.

Yes, a large number (perhaps the majority, although I have no figures) of our units in America are sponsored by churches and synagogues. And of that group the chief Christian denominations that sponsor are Catholic, Methodist, Prebyterian,and the Latter-Day Saints.

Yes, in most cases, a church sponsored unit will accept members from other denominations. The unit I serve is sponsored by a Methodist church. We have boys and leaders from various other denominations and also some with no church affiliation at all. That is the relative norm here in the states.

"Conservative" in the context of churches in America that sponsor units is a bit harder to pin down. That gets into a lot of other issues. In my opinion, the church that sponsors our troop tends to fall into the liberal spectrum of Christianity. Here on this forum alone you would find many Christians who have different doctrinal perspectives and varying views on the interpretation of the Scriptures and we could have a "Conservative vs. Liberal" debate from now until Jesus comes back. Maybe the interesting thing in that, is when it comes to the nuts-and-bolts of the Scouting program most of us can put all that on the back burner and work together as a team.

Obviously, however, the historical Christian view of the practice of homosexuality does color the debate within Scouting here in America.

[packsaddle 753]

"...we could have a "Conservative vs. Liberal" debate from now until Jesus comes back."

Sorry to inform you: that already happened. Back in 1996. You and I and all the rest of us have been 'left behind'. Have a nice day.

[WAKWIB 107]

bummer

[NJCubScouter 1389]

BrentAllen asks me,

 

I guess only you have the ability to predict the future?

 

The difference between me and the people I was responding to is that when I say what I think is going to happen, or would happen, in the future, I say "I think" or words to that effect. Or at least, I always try to, and I usually succeed. I do not know for sure what is going to happen in the future, and neither do those who state their predictions with absolute certainty.

 

I don't know of any Scout Troop that operates as an entity to itself. Whether at Camporees or other district or council events, or at summer camp, Troops interact with one another. Are the council camps going to get into the situation where they allow or don't allow gay Scouts to serve on staff? Will they make that decision a public announcement? What about for every other activity or training event they offer? This would be a very large can of worms.

 

The mind of man (and woman) is very inventive. I am confident that solutions could be found to these issues. The fact is, when I am at a camporee or other district event, there are some Scouters in other units who I know well, a larger number that I know only in passing, and most who I don't know at all. If one of them were to be openly gay, and their troop knew it, I probably wouldn't even know it. The fact is, under the current policy, the Scoutmaster of the troop whose tents are "next door" could be, for all I know, a wife-beater, a drunk, a drug addict and all kinds of other mean and nasty things... and for that matter they could be secretly gay. Why should I worry that under a new policy, that Scoutmaster might be openly gay?

 

I think many COs would find another organization to support instead of that new version of Scouting.

 

Well, at least you said "I think." And maybe you'd be right. But there is really no reason why they should. And it wouldn't be a "new version" of Scouting. It would be the same old Scouting, but without one bad policy.

 

BadenP says (ignoring his personal attacks):

 

...the BSA can not have its cake and eat it too, they have to be consistent across the board either homsexuality is against the principles of the scouts or it isn't. What kind of message does it send to have both hetero and homo sexual only units within the same organization. It either is allowable nationally or not allowed nationally, otherwise the BSA would be nothing more than hypocrites.

 

First of all, nobody is saying anything about "homo sexual only units." The idea is that units could select their own leaders, as they do now, and if they wished they could basically ignore the fact that a prospective leader is openly gay. Presumably the vast majority of units who permitted gay leaders would still have a majority (probably a very large majority) of leaders who were heterosexual. That would probably be even more true for the youth membership. As I have said, one of the reasons why this issue is so silly is that the number of openly gay leaders under a new policy would probably be very small, and the number of openly gay youth members even smaller. Second of all, you are right in one sense, that if the BSA changed the policy they would be acknowledging that there is a difference of opinion as to the morality of being openly gay. (And we're not talking about "conduct" here; sexual conduct within the Scouting program would continue to be prohibited; we are talking about status.) I don't see a big deal in acknowledging what is so clearly the case. All the BSA would be doing is treating this moral issue the same as many other moral issues, by letting the unit decide. Right now, there are some CO's that would not appoint a leader who is known to have had an extramarital affair; or to be living with another person (of the opposite gender) outside of marriage; or to have had problems with alcohol, or maybe just someone who "likes a drink or two"; and there other CO's that would appoint a leader in one or more of these situations. The BSA has no absolute nationwide policy on any of these issues, and many others. "Local option" is the rule already for most things. Why not this issue as well? So it's not a matter of "hypocrisy". It's the way the organization already runs, except for this issue.

 

With the majority of scouting units sponsored today by churchs or church groups I think it is a pretty safe prediction that if the BSA allowed homosexuals there would be a mass exodus by those units, it just makes common sense.

 

As I've said above, there is no reason for them to leave just because of what might be going on in another unit. Perhaps my confidence in humanity is misplaced, but I think that when it came time for the actual decision, logic would prevail.

 

[vol_scouter 365]

I can conceive of at least two reasons churches would withdraw. First and most important, many churches will read the bible and conclude that homosexuality is sinful and will see the acceptance by the BSA as condoning sin. Thus, those churches will feel that there is no alternative but to withdraw. A second reason would be the potential for a lawsuit saying something to the effect that the BSA allows homosexuals so every unit should. Whether the lawsuit would be successful or not, the cost is a deterrent.

 

In my area, many volunteers would quit over the issue and Friends of Scouting would be decimated from comments made to me.

 

Part of the reasons to change the policy is to increase the numbers of youth. The only comparison that we have is churches. The only statistics that I have seen on churches that have moved to be more 'inclusive' by accepting homosexual behavior have suffered significant losses in membership. I doubt that parental fear over homosexual abuse on outings will not be a greater factor in the number of scouts than feeling like the organization i more 'inclusive'. Those parental fears may be misplaced but the same parents have misplaced fears about many things that we do in scouting.

 

So I think that the BSA would suffer major losses in members, both scout and scouter, and would suffer losses in funding that I do not believe would be made up in other gains.

[GernBlansten 10]

I'm curious to hear from those who favor the ban on gays, if they also support a ban on gays in other venues.

 

Housing: Do you support the rights of a landlord to not rent his apartment to a gay couple?

 

Employment: Do you support the rights of an employer to reject employment of a gay individual because of his sexual orientation?

 

Education: Do you support a ban on any gay in any student contact position in the public education system?

 

Gun ownership: Do you support a ban on any gay to own a firearm?

 

Voting rights: Do you support a ban on any gay to be allowed to vote?

 

Land ownership: Do you support a ban on any gay to be allowed to own land?

 

Access to public services?

 

The right to a trial by peers?

 

The right of association?

 

The right of religious expression?

 

Sorry, this is rhetorical. I already know your answer. Carry on.

 

[BadenP 93]

NJ

 

Once again I will try to explain to you my position, the RC, LDS and Fundamentalist Christian Churches view homosexuality as an abomination against God, period. If the BSA allowed openly homosexual leaders or scouts into the program with a local option these same churches would still have leave the BSA because even though their units would be able to stay "gay free" the BSA would then be considered to be morally corrupt in allowing something that violates their own core religious beliefs. Why is that so hard for you to understand? With the present organization of the BSA today if all those groups pulled out and started their own group, ie:Royal Rangers, because of the "local option" it is doubtful the BSA could survive. The only way this local option could work would be if all religious groups were made ineligible to become chartering organizations, which we know will never happen.

 

It makes no difference how tolerant public opinion of homosexuality becomes when those in power of most of our religious organizations are so vehemently oppossed to it and they sponsor most of the BSA units. I really think you and Eamonn are looking at this hotly contested issue through "rose colored glasses".

[GernBlansten 10]

Baden,

I fully understand your position.

 

Sometimes, you have to pull the fetid bandage off the wound to heal the body. Sure it will hurt and will take some good flesh with it, but it will allow us to cleanse the wound and allow new, healthy tissue to fill the void.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

BadenP, I fully understand your position. (Gern stole my line!) I don't necessarily agree with it. They might leave, and they might not. Arguing over what someone else might do in a hypothetical situation seems kind of pointless. Neither of us can prove we are correct, nor do I think we will get the chance anytime soon. My main point is, on this issue, I think there is room for both points of view in Scouting. If the opportunity to make that decision ever actually comes up, and those of one point of view decide there isn't room for them, I can't control that.

 

I'll also say (and this is not directed at you BadenP because I don't know if you're in this category or not), I have spent almost eight years in this forum (with some long and short breaks) watching some of those who favor the exclusion of gays saying "If you don't like it, leave." Now, in a hypothetical discussion of what might happen if the policy were changed, it's kind of funny to watch what happens when the shoe is on the other foot. "Oh no, if we change the policy, someone might leave!" So now that's a problem?

 

(Edit: Typo)(This message has been edited by njcubscouter)

[Novice_Cubmaster 10]

I think the sad truth is that many CO's would drop the BSA.

 

I could only hope that many of the scouts rendered unit-less would tell their parents, "I don't care if the only troop in town is chartered by the Gay Atheist Baby Seal Clubbers, I want to be a scout."