Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Oak Tree

What would have to change if gays were allowed in?

Recommended Posts

"In reference to a double standard, no there isn't. We had a male approach a female staffer, and he was dismissed as well. Don't knwo what happened after he left camp. "

The double standard comes from you bringing up the gay situation to make your case, without recalling the hetero one. Yet when I brought up the fact that either situation should result in the same dismissal, you conveniently remember the hetero one and try to side step the double standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GB,

When I was a newlywed, I got sent to summer camp a week after the wedding. Hat to cut short the honeymoon as a result :( My lovely bride visited me one time, and we were told by the CD that nothing will happen on camp property, we would need to get a room elsewhere. Grant you it wasn't with a troop, but it was a scout camping experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It creeps my 14 year old out just as much. He's friends with the gay guy at his homeschool academy, but would never get in a tent with him! "

 

Why? Has your homophobia infected your son also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GB.

 

We cross posted :)

 

Ok in reference to the dismissal, the purpose was to illustrate that yes we do have homosexuals amongst us already. The point I was trying to illustrate was that he did cross the line by approaching several staff members. One youth staffer contacted me about the individual, and I went up the chain of command. He was dismissed quietly, and after wards several folks mentioned that they were glad he left, because of some of the inappropriate comments and suggestions he had made.

 

A sign of old age is that it sometimes take a while to remember things in the past, esp. when physically dealing with three children while you are typing. :)

 

In thinking about the situation, the youth who eventually talked to me had to be coaxed to talk. For whatever reason; afraid to get a coworker in trouble, fear of being labeled a homophobe, afraid that he led the kid on, whatever, it was difficult for himto talk about it. It was alike like "A Time to Tell," but the two youth were the same age. But as I mentioned above, once he left, folks started talking about him in the open, and some of the things he said when not working.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"To play Devil's Advocate for those who state "help other people at all times," remember we also promise 'to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight"

Not really sure what you mean?

Are homosexuals less physically strong and mentally awake than anyone else?

There has been a big fuss in some denominations about the appointments of gay Bishops. While I'm not gay and not a Bishop! I wonder if these guys feel that they are doing something wrong?

Ea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BrentAllen writes:

You libs might want to check out what happened to Scouts Canada, where they opened up membership to girls and gays. From 1997 thru April 2009, they have lost around 138,000 members, on average 11,500 members per year.

 

You cons might want to check out what happened to the Scout Association in the UK, where they opened up membership to girls and gays. They had the largest increase in membership in 22 years in 2007.

 

And you cons might want to check out what happened to the BSA. From 1997 thru 2008, they've lost around 790,000 members (counting their discriminatory membership only).

 

And Brent, you should look up what a post hoc fallacy is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one hand, we've got arguments about how nothing would have to change. On the other, we've got arguments about how it would devastate the membership.

 

Let me play devil's advocate on both sides.

 

Lisabob - you said, in what I interpreted to be an argument that no real new rules would be needed for YP reasons, "But even so, our society expects people - gay or straight - to be able to control themselves. Otherwise, there's no reason for men to stop themselves from raping the first pretty girl they see. Hey, not the guy's fault, he couldn't help himself. Right? Wrong. (and the same holds true in the other direction)" and you added sexual behavior of any sort is unacceptable at scouting events.

My question for you, and for anyone who says the rules don't need to be changed, is whether or not the same argument would apply to letting boys and girls tent together? If not, why not? How would having two gay guys in a tent be different from having a guy and a girl in a tent?

 

Pint - you said it made no difference what so ever with regards to how the introduction of gays in the UK affected membership.

The decision to accept gays was made in October 1997 (according to some semi-reliable source on the internet). In 1998, the membership was 579,451. In 2006 it was 446,350. Now granted, membership had been falling since its peak in 1989, but the admission of gays coincided with an increase in the rate of decline. (1990 was when they made the decision to admit girls).

 

Eamonn - you say "I don't treat [girls] any different than the boys." But surely this isn't true when it comes to sleeping arrangements, is it?

 

skeptic - "we would likely see BSA fairly quickly be decimated." If you were to take "decimate" literally, it means to reduce by 1/10th. Boy Scouts is already down more than that in the past decade, despite sticking to its positions. Does it really seem like a good idea to argue that we don't want to change because it will cause membership loss? Something is causing the loss now.

 

Brent - you argue that gays don't respect, nor do they live by the ideals and values. Can I ask, whose values are you talking about? Where should the BSA be getting its values from?

 

For everyone who is worried about losing members, how do you propose dealing with what Eamonn points out? That is, "Nearly all of the older Sea Scouts I have talked with seem to hold the opinion that the BSA not allowing homosexuals to be members is not right." Isn't that to eventually have an impact on membership?

 

For those who see it as a moral issue, I get why you say BSA should hold its position. For those who see it as a practical issue of losing members, is that really a good argument? Should the BSA really do something that is perceived as unkind and intolerant, just to keep members?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merlyn says about Scouts UK, "They had the largest increase in membership in 22 years in 2007".

 

He and I are both quoting the same data. Membership grew by 2% in 2007, after a roughly four-year plateau and an 18-year decline. It's possible that it's just a statistical anomaly. It's also possible that everyone who was against the changes has now left, and they are now going to start growing under the new rules.

 

Scouting world-wide is up over 28 million, it's highest ever. So despite the declines in Canada, the US, and the UK, it's doing well elsewhere. I have no idea what the policies are compared to the growth rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On second thought, I think BSA would see a dramatic decline in membership if they lift the ban on gays.

Its clear that the BSA is filled with narrow minded bigots who would simply walk away from an outstanding youth program if they couldn't exercise their bigotry openly. It's probably best to placate them. Someday, America will evolve to the point that they don't treat a segment of their people like second class citizens. At that time, perhaps BSA will be mature enough to lift the ban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three points....

 

1. Homosexuality is not pedophelia. Please don't mix up the two.

 

2. An adult of any gender having sexual relations with a youth member of any gender is unacceptable. This has to be a basic tenet of Scouting anywhere whether you accept gays or not.

 

3. In Australia, where girls and gays are welcome members, Scout membership is growing at a very healthy rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Y'all need to distinguish allowing girls in, and allowing gays in.

 

Most homeschoolers are rather conservative.

 

Allowing gays in would push those who are in, out, and eliminate BSA from consideration by those not now participating.

 

Allowing girls in -- if managed properly, w/ separate patrols etc. -- would result in a BIG increase in interest by home schoolers. The #1 objection I've encountered, as I've shopped Scouting to home schoolers, is "Yes, but what about my daughters?".

 

It's probably an odd thing, but going coed in Scouting would attract, not repel, large numbers of conservative home schoolers.

 

Also, it's my impression that some of the Euro Scout units are essentially urban Scouts. As I noted before, I don't think allowing gays in would be such a big deal if your troop is an office and gym troop.

 

Some folks here seem unable to see a difference between being in a classroom or gym with someone, and sleeping with them. Maybe in their worlds, there is no difference. But, the parents I know see a HUGE difference between those two activities, and do not want someone who is sexually attracted to their son -- whether it's a guy or a girl -- sleeping next to him.

 

It appears that some are trying to distract attention from this CORE issue by calling people names and hoping that everyone will overlook the real problems till it's too late.

 

GaHillBilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do the Scouts think about having girls in thier troops? Some boys want a "guys only" place.

 

I remember how the few gay students in my high school of 3100 were treated. They were usually popular with most of the students, yet the nasty sniggers were truly nasty and rather common. I'm wondering how that can be managed without gutting boy led and less rather than more direct adult supervision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest OldGreyEagle

Maybe its because I am so immersed in this issue because of the frequency it comes up on the forum, but I am constantly astounded at the number of times I am talking to New Scouts paernts and I make some reference about God and Gays and they didnt have a clue either way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E,

The the "morally straight" reference is point out that most Christian religions do not support homosexuality and do view it as amoral. The COs would view this stance as antithical to their mission and drop the troops. While Homosexuality does not equal pedophilia, in many Americans' minds it does. So parents opposed to homosexuality will be afraid to let their kids join.

 

Now in reference to declining membership, I think everyone knows my position on it. Don't trust the old stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing would change. I have come to find out that a few of the guys with whom I worked on camp staff, and on the lodge executive commitee when I was a youth are gay. In fact more than one of them are Eagle Scouts, and Vigil Honor members. They said they knew when they were teens but kept it hidden, and are now no longer to be involved in Scouting because they are "out". Which is a shame.

 

On the flip side, one of the co-leaders in my daughters GS troop is "out" and has daughter in the troop. This is one of things I think GSUSA got right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×