BSA membership policy resolution released, will be voted on in May

The Boy Scouts of America’s Executive Committee today released its membership policy resolution, which proposes removing the restriction denying membership to youth on the basis of sexual orientation alone and maintaining the current membership policy for all adult leaders of the Boy Scouts of America.

The resolution, if passed, would be effective Jan. 1, 2014. You can read a summary below or see the complete text at this link (PDF).

Next up, the resolution is sent to all voting delegates, a group of volunteers from every BSA council, who will put it to a vote at the National Annual Meeting next month.

The resolution comes after a lengthy review process in which the BSA gathered perspectives from inside and outside the Scouting family. The five-page Membership Standards Study Initiative Executive Summary (PDF) explains in detail the key findings from this review.

For those with questions, the BSA has prepared this comprehensive list of FAQs (PDF) about the resolution.

Here’s the resolution:

Youth membership in the Boy Scouts of America is open to all youth who meet the specific membership requirements to join the Cub Scout, Boy Scout, Varsity Scout, Sea Scout, and Venturing programs. Membership in any program of the Boy Scouts of America requires the youth member to (a) subscribe to and abide by the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law, (b) subscribe to and abide by the precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principle (duty to God), and (c) demonstrate behavior that exemplifies the highest level of good conduct and respect for others and is consistent at all times with the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law. No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.

BSA media statement

In February, the Boy Scouts of America embarked on the most comprehensive listening exercise in its history to consider the impact of potential changes to its membership standards policy on the organization and gather perspectives from inside and outside of the Scouting family.  This review created an outpouring of feedback from the Scouting family and the American public, from both those who agree with the current policy and those who support a change.

Scouting’s review confirmed that this issue remains among the most complex and challenging issues facing the BSA and society today.  Even with the wide range of input, it is extremely difficult to accurately quantify the potential impact of maintaining or changing the current policy. While perspectives and opinions vary significantly, parents, adults in the Scouting community, and teens alike tend to agree that youth should not be denied the benefits of Scouting.

For this reason, the Executive Committee, on behalf of the National Executive Board, wrote a resolution for consideration that would remove the restriction denying membership to youth on the basis of sexual orientation alone and would maintain the current membership policy for all adult leaders of the Boy Scouts of America.   The proposed resolution also reinforces that Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether heterosexual or homosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting.

The voting members will take action on the resolution during the Boy Scouts of America’s National Annual Meeting next month.

America needs Scouting, and our policies must be based on what is in the best interest of our nation’s children. Throughout this process, we work to stay focused on that which unites us, reaching and serving young people to help them grow into good, strong citizens. Our priority remains to continue accomplishing incredible things for young people and the communities we serve. 

May 8, 2013 update: Thanks to everyone for their feedback on this post. The comments section is now closed. -Bryan

1,457 thoughts on “BSA membership policy resolution released, will be voted on in May

  1. The funniest thing, is that BSA used to make a big deal out of being based on Native American structures and values, and Native Americans weren’t even Christian!

    When did BSA change from a Native-American structured club to a Christian structured club? Does anyone have any insight into the evolution of that aspect of BSA?

    • When did BSA change from a Native-American structured club to a Christian structured club? Does anyone have any insight into the evolution of that aspect of BSA?


      You must have ignored the quotes from Baden Powell that I posted. Baden Powell himself founded the scouting program on Christian principles and used whatever means to at his disposal to teach them.

      • Baden Powell did not found BSA in the U.S. BSA was incorporated in 1911 by W. D. Boyce, who was impressed by Scouts in London and had met Baden Powell there. Early on, BSA merged with the pre-existing Woodcraft Indians, which had been founded in 1902 and was based on popular Native American themes from that time. Aspects of this Woodcraft heritage remain in BSA today, including in the Order of the Arrow award.

        Meanwhile, in London, Baden Powell was also becoming interested in American Indians, as well as Asian Indians. “The Jungle Book”, tales of morality set in India, became the basis for Powell’s cub scout program. Many Cub Scout names and concepts, including “Wolf Cub”, were derived from the Jungle Book. In the U.S, Cub Scouts became a kind of mash-up between the Jungle Book and popular concepts of American Indian lore here.

        So BSA is more than a Christian-based program. From its origins, BSA is a mixture of Christian, Indian, and popular American Indian lore.

        When we talk about the origins of BSA, why do we only mention Christianity, and don’t bring up these clear Asian and American Indian influences on Scouting from its beginning?

        • This statement , to me, is confusing religious values with different cultures. BSA is Christian value based but embraces all cultures. And, incidentally, ‘Jungle Book’ was written by a Brit so I am reticent to agree that Indian (India) influences are part of the BSA, not that it matters.

        • BSA is not Christian-anything based. Read the DRP. BSA welcomes all religions equally. You will not find one official BSA document which states BSA is Christian based.

        • Kipling was born in India and moved to England as a child. I am sure he felt a deep connection to the country where he was born and incorporated some of the myth from the culture into his books. He certainly would have felt a love of country for his birth place.

          This is an interesting artlcle concerning the friendship between Kipling and Baden – Powell, and how “Jungle Book” was incorporated into Cub Scouting.

        • Thank you for the great article on Kipling. Born in India, raised in England, began working his first full-time job at age 16 in Punjab (Pakistan). He became a world traveler after that. Eventually getting married in England at age 26 and then moving to the United States around 1890 where he started his family in Vermont. His writing continued to take him all over the world, and he finally moved back to England around 1900 where he remained until his death in 1936.

          Of all of the writings that could have inspired Baden Powell at the start of Scouting, The Bible, the Quran, the Book of Mormon, the Torah, it is noteworthy that Baden Powell chose the Jungle Book as the basis for Scouting.

          Paden Powell is clear that he intended Scouting to be founded on “universal values”. Not Christian Values, not Traditional Values, not Timeless Values, not Family Values. Universal Values.

          It would be nice to see BSA work that into a slogan sometime.

          When did BSA stop teaching boys about universal values, which are the origin of Scouting? When did BSA change from a universal-value-based organization, which it was at its origin, to a Christian-value-based organization?

        • cwg-mpls said: Paden Powell is clear that he intended Scouting to be founded on “universal values”. Not Christian Values, not Traditional Values, not Timeless Values, not Family Values. Universal Values.

          It would be nice to see BSA work that into a slogan sometime.”

          I have no idea what you just said. Why don’t we start a list of Universal values like his such as the Scout Oath and Law. Are you saying the Scout Oath and Law do not represent Universal and timeless values?

          Or, as I expect, you are saying that sexual behavior changes over tine and we ahould it accept that the Scout Oath and Law bend and sway in the wind with to determine the current mores of Society. I disagree. What was morally wrong in Baden-Powell’s day is probably morally wrong today. Permissive Society has changed the current interpretation of the Scout Oath and Law in to a conservative Oath and Law.

        • Great observation cw, Then it sounds like the BSA has freely chosen to “change” for the better over the years and adopt Christian beliefs into its program; Freedom to choose is a beautiful thing, His design. See.. not all change has to be bad change; sometimes changing something can ultimately make it better. In this case the BSA has become a better organization because of the changes the majority of the membership wanted to make the BSA to be; Christian values based. The USA is predominantly a Christian Nation and a Democracy. Democracy means that the majority rules; not the minority. Fortunately in the USA minorities are free to create their own organizations with the rules and membership policies they choose freely to have. Maybe this is the beginning of such a time as that; a new beginning for you and a strengthening of values for the BSA in order to prepare for the future challenges facing our Nation’s youth. If you really think you have a better way I challenge you to create your own youth organization reflecting all the secular faithless values you think the majority of BSA members should adopt to make you happy; fulfill your selfish desires. Celebrate the change that’s taken place in the BSA over the years and respect what it is to those who freely choose to be part of it and value it for what it is. Some people aspire to fit the mold it challenges youth and adults to fit and some are just trying to change the mold to fit their faithless values. I think the majority need to stand up and fight for what they want the BSA to be. How is it right to steal it away from them just to suit the selfish desires of a tiny segment of our society who think they can prove eternity wrong and try to make wrongful behaviors seem somehow righteous? It isn’t right; its wrongful.

        • Please define the universal values your speaking about or please give a reference as to where these values you choose freely to live by and push on others to live by can be found? Who wrote these values you choose to live your life by? What principles do these universal values do you aspire to live and mold your life to? Why should the values you freely choose for your life become the set of values the BSA needs to adopt to replace the core values the BSA has already adopted and has set for youth to freely choose to aspire to and mold their lives into to become the good man their driven in their heart to become by the Holt Spirit of God?

        • Yes, the Scout Oath and Law represent Universal Values. And, unlike current BSA policy and teaching, the Scout Oath and Law say nothing about sex. I think all Scout families would welcome BSA returning to the universal values stated in the Scout Oath and Law.

        • “What was morally wrong in Baden-Powell’s day is probably morally wrong today.”

          In Baden-Powell’s day, it was morally wrong for women, and blacks, and Catholics, to be leaders over white, Protestant men. Fortunately, and wisely, the Scout Oath and Law say nothing about gender or race or creed. Times change. Universal values do not change.

        • “Then it sounds like the BSA has freely chosen to… adopt Christian beliefs into its program;”

          Has BSA written that in a document, statement, or policy somewhere?

          I’m not aware of one.

          I would think changing the basis for moral authority for an organization would be important enough to be written down somewhere.

        • The core values of BSA, as stated in the Scout Oath and Law, are universal values. No need to change them. Not in 1991. Not now.

      • The question was asked, when did the BSA change from a Native-American structured club to a Christian structured club? To answer this question, let’s quote from the BSA themselves, instead of add to or take away from what they said. ” …..(a) subscribe to and abide by the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law, (b) subscribe to and abide by the precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principle (duty to God), and (c) demonstrate behavior that exemplifies the highest level of good conduct and respect for others and is consistent at all times with the values expressed in the Scout Oath and Scout Law. No youth may be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone……” When the BSA asked the boys to subscribe and abide by the precepts of the Declaration of Religious Principles, can anyone show me in this document where it requested, stated or required the value to be based on Christian? Native American, as well as other religious groups have strong positive values that show respect, love, and affirmation of good qualities, which are also consistent with Christian qualities, and part of the Scout Oath, and Scout Promise, but it does not require a person to be Christian. Scouting is acceptable and applies to all groups of people, not just Christians.

  2. Most all the comments here relate to the “NOW THEREFORE” part of the resolution, which is appropriate. However, I do have some problem with

    AND WHEREAS, Scouting is a youth program, and any sexual conduct, whether homosexual or heterosexual, by youth of Scouting age is contrary to the virtues of Scouting;

    Youth members of Venturing can be up to 21 years of age. Youth members can be married. Youth members can themselves be parents. I don’t see how BSA can make this statement without exception.

    • I fully agree. BSA has no role teaching the appropriate age for becoming sexually active to boys. Sex education is the role of families and clergy, not BSA.

    • I think the point the resolution is making is twofold: one) sex education is between a scout and his family (and their moral principles); two) no one should be engaging in any sexual activity at a scouting activity. My wife and I are both scout leaders, but we wouldn’t “celebrate our anniversary” in the middle of camporee…

      • 1) If sex education is between a scout and his family, then why is BSA teaching scouts that homosexuality is immoral?

        2) If the issue is scouting activity, not scouting age, then the wording of the resolution should be changed. It currently says “scouting age”.

        3) Do you and your wife wear wedding rings? Do other Scouts know you are married? Do you attend Scout events as a couple? Do you tell Scouts about trips that you and your wife take together? Then you are displaying your sexuality in Scouts. Which is fine. But I don’t know why we don’t extend the same respect to gays. A Scout is Reverent… He respects the beliefs of others.

        • While I disagree that reverent has anything to do with respecting others beliefs, I do agree that we should respect others beliefs. Does that mean that we need to agree with or sustain them? NO! Respecting anything is a two way street. If it does not exist both ways then it does not exist.

        • We do not have to agree with one another to respect one another. That is the beauty of BSA’s Chartering Organization structure. It allows groups of all types, even those who don’t agree with each other on non-Scouting issues, to all charter their own BSA units. In addition, each Chartering Organization has the ability to add additional requirements to qualify as an adult leader for a troop, and can include some instructional material that is outside of BSA into the curriculum for their Scouts.

          BSA’s structure makes it possible for all Scouts to respect each other, even on non-Scouting issues on which they might disagree.

        • “I disagree that reverent has anything to do with respecting others beliefs,”

          Respecting other beliefs is specifically listed as part of BSA’s definition of “Reverent”. Sounds like you need to brush up on your Tenderfoot requirements.

        • cw, You and your like minded cronies are just too funny. The way you lie and manipulate truths to serve selfish personal desires and serve evilness. You are so much not what the BSA spirit is all about. Its a shame how disloyal you and your like minded homosexual activists are to tje BSA if your members and how shameful you all are to a free American organization if you aren’t. I know the truth of your heart tells you that homosexual behavior will never be acceptes by the vast majority of our society and it will ALWAYS be an abomination to God’s creation. His truths are truths of the heart of all humankind. I assume that if your all members then Loyal is a point of the law you’ve all vacated because you should be standing up for the BSA and everything it stands for rather than attacking it and trying to destroy what it means to so many people.

        • Having women leaders will never be accepted by many in our society, and it will ALWAYS be considered by some to be an abomination to God’s creation. Yet we find a way to get along in Scouting.

          Sectarian differences have always existed, and always will. Yet we can still get along. That is the whole point of Scouting.

        • cwgpls. Why are you so controversal your comments mostly give Scouting a bad name. The scout leaders on this website know your comments is to get attention and there is a lot of your comments that are factually untrue. I am not sure of the outcome of this new proposal if it passes it will be a proposal of division that only Satan and his followers will like. I do believe that it will not be in the best interest of the youth of America and the principles of scouting. Scouting is a team organization and if we are not a team player then you are not a Scouter. From most comments, articles and statements the new proposal is the wrong direction and I believe that the majority should prevail. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

        • Please do not focus on me. Just list my untrue statements and explain how they are untrue. That is the way respectful conversation works.

          I’ve already made it clear that I don’t like the new proposal either.

          I don’t even know why BSA has to have a policy about sexuality, other than to say sexuality has nothing to do with Scouting, which was BSA’s official position until around 1990.

        • cw, are you now trying to control and dictate the tone and verbage of this debate. You honestly don’t have a BSA leg to stand on as everything you struggle to support has no basis in BSA policy. The vast majority of the BSA membership support the current membership policy as illustrated by the results of the survey shown in an earlier post on this debate. Truth just can’t be changed because you wish it to be. You strive to manipulate the truth to serve your evil purpose. Fortunately those that understand truth see through your scheme as yours and other left wing aggressive militant homosexual advocates tactics have become revealed and have taken on a comical tone. People know right and wrong; it haunts their spirit and God reveals truths to them; doesn’t have to be a written on paper; its burned in the heart if all Godly people. Your wrongful for trying to steal and hijack the BSA to serve your evil, selfish purpose. You don’t care if it survives to serve our Nations youth; You want it to serve your selfish purpose and the purpose of other evil people who only care about it because in stealing it you’ll claim some sort of perverted righteousness that homosexual behaviir is acceptable in spite of God’s denouncement of its sinfulness. . Good luck with that disobedience..

        • The proposal under consideration still discriminates against Christian churches that believe that homosexuality is a God-given trait and not a sin, and that are “open and affirming” to gays and lesbians. But at least it prevents the abomination of boys being approved by their own Board of Review for Eagle and then being denied the Eagle because some “Gladys Kravitz” has discovered that they let slip somewhere that they are gay.

          In time Scouting will move into the 21st century. Probably in another 5-10 years or so.

  3. After just reading “Our ‘Family Discussion’ ” in the May-June 2013 issue of Scouting magazine, it is looking like the Key 3 aren’t “getting it”. I now fear that the forthcoming vote may almost be just a pro forma act, and the resolution will be added.

    These are dark days for Scouting, but mostly for the families and their boys/young men working to be true to their Judeo-Christian faiths. While there is always hope that the voting members will do the right thing and vote against the resolution, I can’t help but see the end of many families’ association with the B.S.A. given what seems to be the likely vote.

      • I doubt at this point that the B.S.A. will turn anyone away as long as they are willing to pay and/or sell their products. When you embrace moral relativism you can welcome all kinds of things. The dilemma won’t be for the B.S.A., it will be for those trying to be faithful to traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs. Those folks will have to decide if staying with an organization that would have thrown away an opportunity to lead rather than follow can be at all consistent with those beliefs.

        • Read BSA’s Declaration of Religious Principles. Count how man times the word Christian, Christ, or Jesus appears. Please report your findings here.

    • John – there are many, MANY Jewish synagogues and Christian churches that support the resolution. Plus, both the Mormon Church and American Catholics have said it’s fine with them.

      Unless I’ve missed something and none of those groups are “Judeo-Christian,” your point isn’t making sense. Yes, there are some Christian churches and some Jewish synagogues that continue to believe that homosexuality is a conscious sin rather than a God-given trait. But there are many others that don’t.

      • Can you please indicate where the Catholic Church supports this resolution? I think there is a great deal of misinformation going around. A scout is trustworthy.

        • I don’t know about any official Catholic Church position. But the proposal would seem to align well with Catholic teachings about sex.

          1) any boy can join Scouting, even a gay boy, as long as he is not sexually active in any way
          2) no sex by anyone until they are married
          3) no marriage until 18
          4) no gays over 18 allowed. period.

          I don’t see much there that would contradict Catholic doctrine on human sexuality. But I am not Catholic, so I could be wrong.

        • The Catholic teaching is “Masturbation and Homosexuality are contrary to the will of God.” Homosexuality is a sin. We do not want to promote sin. This is a real non-issue for the vast majority of people. The problem is with the gay activists who have joined scouting (on false premises) who are trying to change (corrupt) scouting from within. This is not trustworthy nor loyal. My uncle fought in Vietnam and there is a phrase when the enemy infiltrates your lines. It is then the battle becomes ferocious.

        • “Masturbation and Homosexuality are contrary to the will of God.”

          Okay, then. I see where Catholics would have a problem with the proposal, since it explicitly acknowledges that gay boys are permitted to be Scouts. I guess this is where Catholic teaching differs from Mormon teaching. The LDS church allows that being homosexual, or having “same sex attraction” as they call it, is not contrary to the will of God. It is the acting on that attraction, or the homosexual behavior, that is contrary to the will of God.

          So the proposed policy fits in with Mormon doctrine: same-sex attraction is tolerated as long as it is not acted on. This is different from the Catholic teaching you state, that any form of homosexuality is wrong and must not be allowed.

        • cwgmpls I did not want to refer to religious arguments for passing the new proposal. I feel that many bloggers including myself have spent to much time on the pros and cons from a religious prospective. I believe that those 1400 voters will vote based on what permanent and financial harm will be done to the organization with the new proposal. With your comments about the LDS Church allowing homosexuals in the Church I need to respond. Homosexuals that are active sexually in the LDS Church will have a real struggle in their membership as they will be excommunicated for not repenting and not ceasing their sexual behavior. For those who believe they are homosexual due to various circumstance’s choice or otherwise they will be ask to abide by the LDS Doctrine that sexual homosexualty is a sin. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints mission to the world is a conversion process to the teachings of God and his son Jesus Christ he came into the world not to condemn the world but to save it. The Church will never wavier from their core beliefs unless directed by God and revealed through his Prophets. The recent comments by the LDS on approval of the new BSA policiy on allowing homosexual youth into the scouting program is that those that have homosexual feelings will be converted to the teachings of the gospel as God has defined it. This is the difference between the reason for the Churches approval on the new proposal and the BSA’s approval. My personal feelings even though I am member of the LDS Church as a Scoutmaster I hope the new proposal will not be approved it will bring challenges that will be long term and controversal. I also believe that the LDS reason for approving the new proposal is in line with the Churches position that all can be saved by the process of conversion to the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I hope that this will clear up the misconception that the LDS condones active and open homosexual lifestyles, they clearly do not. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

        • Thanks, Trenton. That is my understanding too. The LDS church permits “homosexual feelings” within its members, with the understanding that those feelings will be corrected or resolved over time.

          That is what I am reading in the proposed policy. Boys with homosexual feelings will be permitted into Scouting, but it is expected the issue will be resolved before they become an adult leader.

          This new proposal reads as a particularly Mormon policy to me. Many Catholics, Baptists, and other conservative religious folks, are not comfortable with any acceptance of homosexuality; even accepting “homosexual feelings” is a stretch too far for them. And many progressive religious folks, who want gays fully welcomed into Scouting, are not comfortable with the exclusion of gays after the age of 18.

          This particular view that gays can be accepted, within limits and up to a certain age, and then not accepted after that certain age, does not sound so much like a compromise to me. It reads more like a re-statement of a specific Mormon doctrine regarding sexuality.

        • cwgmpls Unwilling I give you comments that you can misinterpret. The passing of this new proposal has nothing to do with the fact that someday the young scout before he becomes 18 will no longer be homosexual. Without personal revelations and spiritual guidence the young homosexual in scouting might become more sexually active as a homosexual and possibly be a threat to other scouters.The BSA should not and will not try to change the homosexual desires of those who participate in this behavior. So the LDS and the BSA have different responsibilities on the their roles reguarding homosexual activities in Scouting. The new proposal will be a burden to implement and will be the gateway to admit active adult Homosexual leaders into the BSA this will not happen in the LDS Church. Law suits will come like a class five hurricane no way to avoid it. Trenton Spears

  4. None of the comments here are going to change anybody’s mind. We’re screaming at monitors, with no ears to hear.

    I have already informed my Cub Master that if the measure is approved, he will need to find a new Webelos leader for next year. It’s sad that those who love Scouting and its principles are watching the organization cave to the bullying of those who seek only to crush those principles.

      • I truly believe there is one fact nobody on the Progressive side seems to get. Christians choose the word of God over any Program. A Christian will not wallow in immorality just to be a Boy Scout. Boy Scout Policy has to be compatible with Christian beliefs and values for a Christian to stay. The Bible says to flee immorality.

        Its called taking a stand and a principled one at that.

        • Leaving sex education up to the family and church, and out of BSA, is completely compatible with Christian beliefs and values.

        • Do Baptists understand the Word of God better than the Episcopalians? Who reads it better, Mormons or Catholics? For two thousand years, Christians have demonstrated great variety in their understanding of the Word of God. America was founded because our leaders were tired of religion being used for persecution of minorities. Baden Powell founded a worldwide network of “peace scouts” who are brothers in uniform and tolerant (not approving of, but tolerant) of our differences. And if it is really an issue of Christian morality, show me the council that kicks out the adult leader who gets divorced or who works as a money-lender.

        • Fred, with all due respect, accusing those who support the resolution – including the unanimous Executive Board, plus the Mormon Church, plus the Catholic Church, plus UCC, Episcopalians, etc. – of “wallowing in immorality” is a little much.

          As long as all persons involved in the program, youth and adults, abide by Youth Protection guidelines, there will be nothing for you to “flee.”

        • With all due respect, I cannot stay and any Christian who believes homosexuality is immoral cannot stay and that is all I am saying. If a person by definition is an open and avowed homosexual, he is advertising that he engages in the practice. I don’t want that behavior around. Sexuality has no place in Scouting as a topic of conversation in teaching or administering the program. I don’t want to have to deal with it on Campouts and around the Campfire. If the proposed policy is adopted, I will leave that to you and those left in Scouting.

        • Fred Cooper you are always right on. There is no middle ground on homosexuality it is either a sin or it is not. When God reveals it is not a sin then his word is final and I will obey his word. I thought that President Obamas comments on Jason the Basketball player congradulating him for stating he is Homosexual was beneath the pail and unpresidential the President should have remained silent and respected the office that he holds. The homosexual train is steaming ahead and pushing God and his teachings right off the track. Homosexual and those supporting homosexuality will in time realize that they are on a bridge to nowhere and will fall off the path to Heaven and life eternal. They can drive God out of scouting but they cannot drive God out of a Scout. Trenton Spears

        • the one tenth of one percent of homo men in this country hardly make much of a voting block. Obama was pretty quiet on the issue first term because he knew it would crush him in the poles. It isn’t a real movement; real numbers don’t support homosexual behavior. maybe next term a homo male couple should run for pres. & Vice pres. on the Dem ticket. Then I’ll run for president or maybe Bartamus; I think Gumby & Poky could win that race. Truth always reveals itself. Be patient for Justice. God always has His Victory over Evil. In His time and in His way..

        • More disturbing opinions from the BSA. This one from the legal team:

          > The interpretation Mike wrote correcting me, and was subsequently confirmed by
          > the national teleconference last night and a posting by BSA’s counsel, states
          > that a unit must take a youth who applies as an openly homosexual youth, and
          > must do so even if the CO specifically prohibits that behavior/orientation.

          All the progressive voices out there who say the CO’s will not come under attack, here is your proof. I can see homosexual boys encouraged by parents and friends to apply to join a conservative CO whose beliefs do not support open and avowed homosexuals as adults or children. So why spend the bucks retaining a Troop Charter when clearly BSA is against you and your beliefs?

        • Fred,
          That is not proof. It is your conjecture but you did not “prove” anything.

        • DLDW, I don’t know what kind of proof you need or want. Signed sworn statements from every Christian I know? Or, would that make it regionally biased? A blanket statement from Southern Baptist Convention? Or, would that make it denomination-biased. Its a true statement according to the direct scripture in the Bible. What other proof is there? You can deny it but the Bible is clear for Christians and that is the only people I am addressing.

        • Why would any boy join a Troop where he is not welcome? Why would any parent force their child to join a Troop where he would be at the mercy of those that do not want him as a member.

          There is a boy at our church that joined a troop at a local Baptist Church. After one year his is considering quitting Scouts because the boys in the Troop do not meet his moral standard. He is frustrated that the older boys sneak off to smoke, they frequently swear and terrorize the younger scouts. I spoke with his mom and suggested they try a different Troop instead of quitting. She just shook her head and told me that they made a mistake in having him join a Troop that they didn’t visit more than twice with leadership that was uninvolved.

          Obviously that Troop did not match their needs and now there will be one less boy in Scouting.

          Fred, you said, “All the progressive voices out there who say the CO’s will not come under attack, here is your proof.” What proof do you have that they will come under attack? Speculating that something may happen is not proof that it will happen.

        • DLDW, I am impressed. You actually found a Baptist Troop to hold up as an example of bad experience in Scouting. They’re out there and are bad Troops of all faith and non-faiths and they will continue to be out there with homosexual behavior added to the mix.

          I posted earlier twice and I am sure you read it so I am not going to post it again. You can navigate the blog as well or better than I can and find it if you’re interested which I do not see fact making much difference with you and facts are funny things and Universal truth is hard to come by as we have seen on this thread. Your truth is not my truth and vice-verse. That much is true..

          So read slowly and let this sink in.

          Posted on Scouts-L was a specific response to a specific question posed to BSA National and they answered with an answer that had been vetted by BSA Legal Dept. The Council asked if a CO would have to accept and open and avowed homosexual youth if their faith and beliefs did not condone such behavior. The unequivocal answer was that the CO would have to accept the Scout for membership and could not deny his expression of his sexuality in the Troop which is obvious because he is open and avowed. Only a fool would think he would not..

          So, just for kicks and giggles, let’s walk through a CO scenario if the proposed policy passes. The Troop is an Outreach ministry of a conservative Church and no Scout is a member of the Church. The Scoutmaster informs the Chartered Organization Rep (Youth Minister) of the revised policy who reviews the situation with the Senior Pastor. The Church Staff meets and is unanimous that homosexual behavior is a sin in the eyes of God and immoral based on scripture, doctrine and personal belief. The Pastor calls the Chairman of Deacons who affirms their decision. The Scoutmaster and Troop leadership are informed that the Church will next Sunday be presented with the revised policy and vote on the matter of maintaining a Charter for a Troop given that acceptance of open and avowed homosexual young man will now be enforced. The Church affirms that Scouting is no longer compatible with Church teaching and God’s Law governs this matter and it is clear. Scouting is only one of many programs offered at the Church to Youth. The Scoutmaster is present at the meeting as are the leadership of the Troop. Troop parents are informed that the Charter will be surrendered and they can organize on their own and form a Troop if they desire. Unfortunately, the facilities of the Church and the vehicles used by the Troop will no longer be available since Boy Scouts is not longer associated with the Troop. The budget will also cease immediately after payment of current bills. Meeting space will be converted to other purposes and Scout equipment will be transferred to another Youth Ministry as the Church bought it all including the Trailer.

          The parents and Scouts are understandably upset but at the enforced Policy, not the Church. The Scoutmaster and Asst. Scoutmasters resign and so all registered leaders. The parents see no future in Scouting for their sons and decide not to stay in Scouting since eventually the homosexual issue will be in front of them and BSA literature will eventually teach tolerance and acceptance of homosexual behavior and Youth Protection will address how to do so through required training.

          I am Scoutmaster of this Troop. If the Policy is approved, this is what will happen. We have already met about it. The Troop started in 1946.

          So, to me, denial of religious freedom of a Chartered Organization is an attack. You may not think so but any rational person would think so. If you don’t think this is proof, I can’t help you.

          Funny too, based on your early posts on this list. If the policy is adopted, certainly denial of religious freedom can be seen as “discrimination.” Since BSA would then support a different “discriminatory” policy and you support the policy, you would be a bigot. But, that’s language is for others. I just think you’re wrong.

        • ” There is no middle ground on homosexuality ”

          Which is precisely why the whole issue should be left outside of Scouting, entirely. For some religions, there is no middle ground on the role of women. There is no middle ground on drinking alcohol. There is no middle ground on eating pork.

          That is why sectarian issues, which are not universal across all religions and people, were intentionally left out of Scouting from the beginning.

          A simple statement from BSA which reads “Instruction on sexuality is outside the role of BSA. Such instruction should be left to families and clergy. No BSA unit should contradict the teachings of family or clergy on matters of sexuality.” should be passed, the sooner the better.

          Then us Scouts can get on with Scouting, and be rid of this distraction which has eaten up millions of Scouting hours and dollars over the last 20 years, with no benefit to anyone, and with great harm to BSA as an institution.

        • Allowing open and avowed homosexuals in Scouting is not bringing sexuality into Scouting. Keep repeating that line. It’s in and here to stay with the revised policy.

        • Fred,
          Your story is speculation. Your story adds to the fear mongering. Your story is not proof that any of what you mention will happen.

        • I’m sorry DLDW. but as a Scout is Courteous and you just called me a liar, please do not direct any more posts to my attention. I will not respond to them.

        • “Allowing open and avowed homosexuals in Scouting is not bringing sexuality into Scouting.”

          How does allowing open and avowed homosexuals into Scouting introduce the topic of sexuality any more than allowing open and avowed heterosexuals into scouting?

        • See “open” definition 2b and 2c

          See avow(ed) definition 1 and 2


          (pn) adj.1. a. Affording unobstructed entrance and exit; not shut or closed. b. Affording unobstructed passage or view: open waters; the open countryside. 2. a. Having no protecting or concealing cover: an open wound; an open sports car. b. Completely obvious; blatant: open disregard of the law. c. Carried on in full view: open warfare; open family strife. d. Sports Not closely defended by an opponent: an open receiver.


          (-vou) tr.v. avowed, avowing, avows 1. To acknowledge openly, boldly, and unashamedly; confess: avow guilt. See Synonyms at acknowledge. 2. To state positively. Any question? At all? is it that hard for you to understand? Really?

          Fred Cooper

          Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 18:18:41 +0000 To:

        • I wear a wedding ring, clearly visible to everyone. I often tell others, including Scouts, about trips that my wife and I take together. My wife and I have even taken a public vow of our marriage together. I am an open and avowed heterosexual. Once we make sure open and avowed homosexuals stay out of Scouting, will we be kicking out open and avowed heterosexuals next?

        • Since gays cannot marry except under man’s law where it has been coerced into being law, I don’t think you have a valid premise on which to make an argument. Man and woman together is the natural way of things.

          Man/Man Woman/Woman is one trying to be the other in a same-gender relationship.

        • Gee Fred,
          Hypocritical much? It is ok for you to state that someone’s view point is speculation but when your story is referred to as such you state that the person making that observation is calling you a liar. Then you have the gall to take your toy and go home.

          This is your quote from a conversation with Dan: “sheer speculation but that is all any of this discussion is on the proposal.” Hmmmm?

        • Sorry DLDW, I can’t let that go by. Compound calling me a liar by telling a lie. You are one special person in that special world you live in.

          Your quote of me was from a previous post that was not a specific Troop and a specific CO and I was speculating what could happen. My story that you responded to was the actual story of my Troop. No speculation at all. So you’re wrong. Again!

          I’m still in the debate, just not with you. Your fabrications are tedious at best, insulting at worst.

      • Hopefully we are reading each other’s comments and considering them. I sure am trying. As many have said, it’s about the Scouts. Realistically, “No change, ever!” is just not an option. We do not live in the USA of a century ago when the BSA was founded, We do not even live in the USA in which were were Scouts when we were kids. Today in the USA there are many tens of thousands of kids growing up in families with same sex parents. Of course it wasn’t their choice. The first time Johnny arrives at a Cub Scout family campout with his two Moms, you’ll have to deal with it. The fact that this is biologically impossible can’t matter. What you think of his parents can’t matter. You have to make that Scout welcome, protect him from bullying, just like every other Scout. Then it’s going to hit you that “No change, ever!” is not an option.

        • I kind of wish Scouts would have discovered the “No change, ever!” mantra right after they wrote the 1984 sexuality policy. That one was actually half decent. Unfortunately, BSA changed is position on sexuality after that. And it keeps changing today.

          BSA has obviously changed in many ways through the years. Change is a part of life; the only organizations that do not change are the ones that are already dead.

          It is impossible to change in a healthy way if we are in denial that change is occurring, even now.

        • Change is one of those funny words people think means something good initially. There is such a thing as bad change and there is absolutely no good yo be gained from changing the BSA membership policy. cw, you seem to have either no vision of the problems this change will bring if its made or you seem to have no care. I have a feeling your not going to be in a position where you would have to deal with all the problems this will cause because I have yet to see you address how the various problema with this bad change will be handled. Maybe your the type of person who just pushes for your way and then lets someone else deal with all the problems you’ve created; nowhere to be found. The BSA will be fine if it keeps its current child protective membership policy in place. Its a shame it ever had to become an issue in the first place; I hold Dale responsible for that with his initial wrongful claims to want a leadership role in an organization where he knew perfectly well he was violating and not qualified bases on the oath he knew perfectly well. But every change isn’t good and the BSA would be foolish to break what they’ve gone to great extents to establish. A lot of leaders are counting on them to do the right thing and sustain a membership standard that serves the BSA well in many ways.

        • Christians already wallow in immorality we have sit in our buts and done nothing or said anything when prayer was taken out of school or the church taken out of public schools are goverment we let the morals be taken out of this country now we want to blame the scouts for the mess we let get out of hand because we didnot want to be the bad guys.Guess what we as christians have let this country go to hell and we only have asre selves to blame.The BSA are trying to deal with the mess we gave them now we all want to be high and mighty and tell everyone want a great christian we are and run away from a group who is trying to keep it’s head above water.are the key 3 doing a good job ? No have we done a good job? No so two wrongs are not going to make a right. We need to take what we have and make it work. Jesus didnot run from the cross.So if we are Christian we need to work harrd to make this work.

      • I always thought progress was advancement. like the transcontinental railroad, going to the moon, the 14th amendment to free the slaves, etc…. How is condoning homosexuality progress???? It sounds more like were being going backword to the Roman/Pagan times. Please explain.

        • How can saying nothing about homosexuality be construed as condoning homosexuality? If BSA says nothing about bank robbery, does that mean BSA condones bank robbery?

        • Well said! We are all born with tendencies. I have met a few young boys who had a terrible tendency to lie. However, he was held accountable to the scout law; A scout is trustworthy. Should we have a segment of the policy indicate that we also accept boys with a tendency to lie? No No. Stop corrupting the law. A scout is morally straight. (period)

      • Mark Gonzales don’t sell these blog comments short it does have an impact because many of the bloggers input a lot of information and there are many voters that will read these blogs and use their comments to determine how they will vote I have talked to one of the voters that live in my Council area and he will not approve the new proposal by the BSA. Keep the faith. Trenton Spears

  5. Here is a scenario I wasn’t given by the polling agency. My SPL is really great working with the younger Scouts and has been particularly focused on working with a fourteen year old second class Scout. They have even been meeting after school because they live in the same neighborhood. I am Scoutmaster of the troop where the seventeen year old SPL comes out of the closet with the new BSA policy. What do I do next? I don’t have any way of judging this sort of relationship due to the aspect of camaraderie and “boy led” program we have with BSA. Unfortunately due to my ignorance I may have inadvertently encouraged this because the second class scout had stalled out and I thought extra help would be beneficial. What do I say to the parents when they come to me and announce that they believe their son has been seduced? I know, call the police, the abuse line etc. but here is the dilemma: BSA is a boy led program where proximity is a natural part of the works. I know I am probably showing my ignorance here but don’t we lay ourselves open to creating a situation of temptation and wrongdoing? Heck, we encourage the boys to sleep three to a tent in cold weather camping. Will we be accused of prejudice when we find that an openly announced homosexual scout can’t get anyone to sleep with him? Or that one particular scout sleeps with him on every occasion? After all, they announce, they are just friends. I see a whole new set of problems which will have to be addressed with a change of policy. I am also afraid there are a whole set of problems as yet unseen by this change. Remember, Scoutmasters come in all shapes and sizes and not all are equipped as well as some of you intellectuals posting on this site.

    • Changing the policy IMO will not stop the lawsuits as you just pointed out. and it will not bring in more money as some are being led to believe. I believe this move by Liberal progressives is all about destroying the organization from within that has had the courage to take a stand on morality. It is my opinion that should this resolution pass that 3 years from now membership in BSA less than half of what it is right now.

      • > I believe this move by Liberal progressives is all about destroying the
        > organization from within that has had the courage to take a stand on morality.

        This isn’t about destroying Scouting. This is about diversity and equality. I, and my denomination, believe that this is a Social Justice and Civil Rights issue.

        Diversity is achieved through equality, and diversity strengthens us. Separation and division inevitably lead to distrust and hate. You can see that in the horrible things that have been said by people in this forum.

        I have learned that the sexual orientation of a person does not determine their character, value or worth.

    • John, I am with you. As I posted somewhere else in this massive blob (lol) While some are thinking of morals or equality, I am thinking of logistics, implementation, and other long term effects. You can be pro or against the policy but these still need addressed in the organization. I fear no one in the hierarchy is doing this.

      -Have they talked to our insurance about the policy change on liability?

      -If I knowingly put a gay boy in a tent and something happens am I liable in court? Will Insurance cover me?

      -Should I put 3 to a tent vs our current troop policy of 2/tent so we have 2 deep protection? the more boys in a tent the more noise issues we generally have. Our current tent size will make 3/tent difficult.

      -Will there be a national coming out manual such as there is in Great Britain and will a leader be required to follow it even if it is against their value system? Will they have to get extra training and because of homosexuality, it becomes forefront in discussions, etc in programing. Will the boys be required to take training and indoctrination of acceptance that their parents may disagree with?

      • Not that I am siding with the resolution, but to try to answer your questions, the Key 3 claim that in this “listening period” that legal/liability issues were assessed and apparently they determined that the currently proposed change would not increase risk in this area (not that I necessarily agree with that ).

        While I believe no person practicing homosexuality belongs in Scouting, I also do not equate pedophilia with practicing homosexuality. Additionally, of the two categories of members the B.S.A. has been discussing (adult and you members who are avowed homosexuals), I would think the least likely persons practicing homosexuality that would have inappropriate sexual contact with a Scout youth member would be the adults. The youth member practicing homosexuality, I would think, would be the one most likely to attempt such a behavior (like the tent scenario discussed).

    • A boy is far, far more likely to be molested by a straight boy than a gay boy. For one thing, there are like 100 times more straights around than gays. For another, all boys are naturally sexually curious. Any disturbed straight boy can easily act out on this curiosity in inappropriate ways. It happens all the time. It happened to me when I was a boy. One more than one occasion, another boy (who later turned out to be straight) suggested that we expose our genitals to each other. Or touch each other. Or encourage each other to touch ourselves. It is normal curiosity, and most every straight boy will run into at least one event where another straight boy will try to act sexually inappropriately with them.

      We all teach boys, from the youngest age, about “good touch, bad touch” and about immediately leaving uncomfortable situations, reporting any concerns to an adult.

      All boys need to know how to respond to sexual abuse. Primarily because they are surrounded by other straight boys. The fact that a small percentage of gay boys might be around does not increase the danger of sexual abuse of boys at all.

      A boy is far, far more likely to be molested by a straight boy than a gay boy. The same protective measures apply to both.

    • John, as a fellow scoutmaster, I want to treat your question with all the seriousness it deserves. This is an excellent “roundtable topic”. First, we all have to admit that this situation could happen today, now. Any older scout left alone with a younger scout has the opportunity to take advantage of him. Youth who are abused can often turn around and start to abuse a younger person. And many child abusers consider themselves “straight” (it’s not logical, but neither is child abuse). Let’s also assume for now that these two scouts don’t actually start a relationship, just to keep things simple for posting purposes.
      Back to the main point: we should employ Youth Protection in any and all troop activities, no matter the location. Scouts who meet should always be under some form of supervision, even if it’s subtle and at a distance. Which touching is inappropriate? Any touching, whether it’s rough-housing, “grab-assing”, teasing, boredom, hazing, or something more, it shouldn’t happen.
      Turning to the secondary topic of dealing with known gay scouts in a unit: if scouts are permitted to unhide their preferences, there will no doubt be an awkward period of adjustment. Troops will literally have to go back to the Forming stage of team development and start again, just as they do every time there is a shake-up in the unit. National shows clips of “Remember the Titans” during Wood Badge, but most kids today really do not understand how black and white kids couldn’t get along before. They may get their chance to understand better.
      Finally, I would encourage all to have a little faith in our youth. The BSA research showed (look up the Youth Report) that a majority of youth, represented by teens, youth scouts and venturers, oppose the old policy and they feel the old policy does not reflect a core value of Scouting. I think our kids are already more adapted to gay tolerance than perhaps many adults are comfortable with. Our kids already know other gay kids at school and I think they will form, storm, norm, and perform faster than many adults expect. And ultimately, Scouting is for the kids.

  6. I know that we are all focusing on the morality on homosexuality.

    I am curious as to what you all think will happen to the membership of BSA should the resolution pass or fail.

    Take a step back and make your best prediction. Look at every country that has altered their member ship policy to match the resolution and allowed open and avowed homosexuals into scouting. What has been the pattern of membership after doing so? What else has those countries done to compensate for the loss of membership? What makes you think that BSA will have a different experience? Did these other countries like the UK and Canada see a surge in membership? Did they see a surge in donations? did they experience a surge in volunteers? Or did they see a rapid decline in all three?

    BSA is not the the first to face this issue. The submit to you that there is no upside to changing to the policy. There is only and accelerated decline.

    • Your comment is spot on. There is no upside to the Policy change except normalization of the sexual behavior of a very small group of young people struggling with sexual identity or those purposely acting out their sexual identity. Those who disagree will get the “my way or the highway” or “what is wrong with you” or my favorite “Can’t you be more tolerant and accepting?”

    • Steve wrote: “I am curious as to what you all think will happen to the membership of BSA should the resolution pass or fail.”

      My view: As it stands now, it is really just a question of _when_ the major churches, conservative (I use that term loosely) organizations, and conservative members leave. The study summary showed clearly that younger people have a different view of the underlying issue than older people. In 15 years, today’s Boy Scouts will be unit leaders. In 15 years, today’s Cub Scout Leaders will be on council executive boards. So even if the pending proposal is defeated this year (I think it will be defeated), change is practically inevitable and the institutions and people for whom this is a moral issue will leave BSA. If the pending proposal is adopted this year, the pace of change will be greatly accelerated. It won’t be more than a few years before the ban on gay adults is lifted. A wild card on timing is lawsuits. The current policy banning only “open or avowed” homosexuals, together with the unanimous Executive Board recommendation of the pending proposal, has essentially eliminated all the bases on which the Supreme Court’s narrow majority sided with BSA in the Dale case.

      The only thing that could alter BSA’s fate, I believe, is conservative elements defeating the pending proposal and BSA taking a sharper turn toward being a religious-based program. Because BSA has blown its First Amendment “right of association” argument, it needs a “freedom of religion” argument. Such a turn would essentially invite the more liberal folks to leave BSA, leaving it smaller and more conservative, and more likely to be left alone as it shrinks significantly.

      But I think such a rightward turn would be very difficult to make, and highly unlikely. The loss of institutional support from the major churches would be a heavy blow in terms of financial and other support, but somewhat less so in membership, as many youth and families in church-sponsored units won’t be bothered by the change and will move to other units.

      The problem is that if the departure of the churches and other conservatives is delayed for a long while, BSA will continue its current long decline, plus additional marginal declines based on its policies, and so will be weaker overall in another decade or two. That will make the split that much harder on BSA, and harder to recover from.

      For that reason, I would like to see this get resolved now, while BSA is still relatively strong and more able to absorb the loss of the conservative elements.

      • Dan said- “The study summary showed clearly that younger people have a different view of the underlying issue than older people. In 15 years, today’s Boy Scouts will be unit leaders. In 15 years, today’s Cub Scout Leaders will be on council executive boards. So even if the pending proposal is defeated this year (I think it will be defeated), change is practically inevitable and the institutions and people for whom this is a moral issue will leave BSA. If the pending proposal is adopted this year, the pace of change will be greatly accelerated. It won’t be more than a few years before the ban on gay adults is lifted.”

        I have seen this stat quoted by many here validating the change. The problem is that young people generally change their views as they mature. Liberals tend to become more conservative, become more religious as they age, especially during child bearing years when they start to consider values they want to pass to their children. they attend church more often.

        My opinion is that cub parents would be more open because of how they camp in cub scouts. Once in boys scouts they become disengaged because of the need for boys to be on their own. Whereas the leadership looks at the broader picture including liability, youth protection, mechanics of programing, and they deal with the issues that the parents are oblivious to because that is the leaders job. I know that we were discrete regarding issues even in cub scouts to minimize the gossip and collateral damage.

        The boys, due to lack of world experience, are naive to potential issues.

        While many are talking about morals or talking about equality, I am thinking ahead to logistics and potential liability, How am I suppose to handle X, Y, or Z. In my position of employment and working with a committee or board I often hear ideas that sound good initially but I look at longer term effects and bring those to the table I find that they didn’t explore the effects down the road including logistics, image,and implementation, and long term effect. All very important for an organization.

        The boys would be similar due to naivity of world experiences.

      • Dan, I appreciate your thoughts. I cannot imagine how you arrived at these positions but it was fun reading. I’d like to offer some perspective.

        Dan said: “The study summary showed clearly that younger people have a different view of the underlying issue than older people. In 15 years, today’s Boy Scouts will be unit leaders. In 15 years, today’s Cub Scout Leaders will be on council executive boards. So even if the pending proposal is defeated this year (I think it will be defeated), change is practically inevitable and the institutions and people for whom this is a moral issue will leave BSA. If the pending proposal is adopted this year, the pace of change will be greatly accelerated. It won’t be more than a few years before the ban on gay adults is lifted. A wild card on timing is lawsuits. The current policy banning only “open or avowed” homosexuals, together with the unanimous Executive Board recommendation of the pending proposal, has essentially eliminated all the bases on which the Supreme Court’s narrow majority sided with BSA in the Dale case.”

        sheer speculation but that is all any of this discussion is on the proposal. Dan, did you change and mature any as your grew up? Are you the same today as you were at 15? Are you values and principles the same? As Winston Churchill said and has been by and large proven:

        “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”

        So, as I said in a post a long time ago on this list, BSA should not look to the least experienced Scouters and most immature boys for direction on major policy decisions. I blush at my memories of my late teens and college days and early marriage years. I was not conservative and had a far more permissive attitude. When my son was born, all that changed. My life had a responsibility far greater than even my own life and that was raising a child to be a responsible man who loves God, family and Country and is a leader in Society. So as was said recently, taught high moral standards and values by parents and Scout leaders they will mature in a responsible manner.

        Dan said: “The only thing that could alter BSA’s fate, I believe, is conservative elements defeating the pending proposal and BSA taking a sharper turn toward being a religious-based program. Because BSA has blown its First Amendment “right of association” argument, it needs a “freedom of religion” argument. Such a turn would essentially invite the more liberal folks to leave BSA, leaving it smaller and more conservative, and more likely to be left alone as it shrinks significantly.”

        Hmm, as 70% of units are sponsored by faith-based organizations and the liberal secular progressives say they will stay and continue to agitate, I reject this proposition outright as unsupportable. We may lose the permissive Churches, whose doctrine is in error because it directly contradicts the Word of God, but that is not the worst thing that could happen to BSA. As long as they follow BSA Policy, all people are welcome. Obviously, active, open and avowed homosexuality is against Boy Scout Policy.

        Dan said: “But I think such a rightward turn would be very difficult to make, and highly unlikely. The loss of institutional support from the major churches would be a heavy blow in terms of financial and other support, but somewhat less so in membership, as many youth and families in church-sponsored units won’t be bothered by the change and will move to other units. The problem is that if the departure of the churches and other conservatives is delayed for a long while, BSA will continue its current long decline, plus additional marginal declines based on its policies, and so will be weaker overall in another decade or two. That will make the split that much harder on BSA, and harder to recover from.”

        Another Statement that I believe is totally unsupportable and I can give an example. My Troop is sponsored by a Conservative Church as an Outreach ministry. None of the Scouting families are members of the Church. None of the parents or Scouts support the proposed Policy. None. They are not going anywhere unless we surrender out Charter. Yours is a specious argument. Certainly some will leave but as hard as it probably is for you to believe, a lot of secular parents seek out Conservative Church Troops for their sons.

        Dan said: “For that reason, I would like to see this get resolved now, while BSA is still relatively strong and more able to absorb the loss of the conservative elements.”

        The loss of faith-based Units will also bring with it a loss of facilities and funding for Troops. Are you not aware that most Church-based CO’s provide these assets as CO’s? It is required by BSA but most government schools and other organizations give it lip service and you are shifted around at their convenience plus you have to comply with their faith system of Secular Humanism.

        A smaller, more effective BSA financially supported by its CO’s is an excellent idea. We could trim back of a lot of the superfluous literature we are forced to accept. Uniforms would not be such a financial burden on families. With Pdf handbooks and advancement maintained on the Cloud we could save untold millions to pay local professionals. Have you seen the current handbook? What an overblown production that should only represent a tool fo learning. Put all those graphics online and print what you need as you need it. On the other hand, this is the 21st Century. Blue cards are so quaint as to be ridiculous but I get charged .08 for every one.

        So, in closing, as much as a 70% loss in Units is acceptable to get that nasty conservative element element out of Scouting. I, for one, would regret the loss of Scouters but readily accept the resignation of those who cannot adhere to the current policy of Boy Scouts and feel the extrtaction of that element would bring an organization with much higher values and principles.

        • Fred, thank you for your thoughtful commentary. Yes, I’m speculating, trying to make the best guess I can about where all this is taking us. And yes, I know that it is certainly possible for folks to grow more conservative as they grow older and have more responsibilities. It is also possible that folks grow more open and liberal as they grow older and accumulate more life experience and exposure to many more different kinds of people. I know I have. But as the study summary tells us, even in the course of the last few years there has been a noticeable shift in views to a more liberal perspective, which I see as an indicator of a broader trend.

          “[N]asty conservative element” — Not my words and not my views. I understand the conservative side of this issue, and respect the fundamental principles underlying the conservative positions. I may not share them anymore, but I ‘get’ them.

          Personally, I think this whole thing was botched. For more than 20 years, BSA has had a generally consistent policy on homosexual membership that has been in line with the major churches and many conservative organizations and members. It isn’t fair to suddenly come and ask them (much less demand) that they consent to a 180 degree change in membership policy. The more liberal institutions and members in BSA have consented to that policy — even if they disagree — by their continued membership. Nevertheless, those more liberal elements also have principled positions that deserve to be heard and considered. We should be having this same “family discussion,” but without the pressure of a looming vote on a drastic policy change. It isn’t fair to our more conservative institutions and members who have been the backbone of Scouting for so long. But we should have started this discussion five years ago or more. Not having done so wasn’t fair to our more liberal institutions and members.

          Because of the moral element at issue here, I don’t see a way to a compromise or accommodation that would keep us all one big happy Scouting family. But had we been given the time and the freedom within the BSA to really (and with the BSA’s blessing) talk about these things in depth and thoughtfully consider and debate a wide range of options, including an amicable separation, we would be in much better shape.

        • I was not intending to attribute the “nasty” comment to you. You are correct that you did not make it. That is the feeling I get from the more radical among us. We are knuckle-dragging Neanderthals that don’t even believe in evolution. 🙂

          You seem to be a reasonable and I believe we can find much common ground. Someone has to lead that family discussion and the leaders we currently have are sorely lacking in leadership skills as demonstrated by trying to slip the first change in Policy by with no discussion. Much like our President, “let’s just do it and see if they will let it fly.”

          We can disagree as we do and stay civil.

          Were you one of the posters that suggested an All-inclusive program through Learning for Life? I am warming up more and more to that idea.

          Keep Scouts as it was originally intended in my opinion. A place for Leadership development and not accommodation of everyone but build leaders of men not just outdoorsmen.

          For the flamers out there. it is my opinion and I have staked our the reasons numerous times.

        • Yes, I have been an advocate of the Learning for Life option. In 1998, BSA had a problem. Schools, fire departments, police departments, and other governmental and civic organizations chartered Explorer posts for youth to learn and practice skills that might lead to careers. But BSA’s membership policies were in conflict with non-discrimination requirements of these chartered organizations. So BSA split the program. Career-oriented Explorer posts were moved to BSA’s subsidiary corporation, Learning for Life (which offered character programs to supplement school curricula), which has a non-discrimination policy. Non-career Explorer posts (such as those focused on high adventure) remained in BSA’s traditional program lineup under a new name, Venturing, with some new (or recycled) program elements. Exploring is doing just fine, with 116,589 youth in 5,285 posts as of the end of 2012 — a 3.28% membership gain over 2011.

          Explorer posts are chartered just like traditional BSA units and are supported by Councils just like BSA units, but Learning for Life/Exploring doesn’t really advertise its relationship to BSA.

          After the pending proposal is defeated at the vote in May, a lot of people are going to be looking around and trying to figure out what to do. Some will be thinking about alternative Scouting organizations. Some will be thinking about whether a split is inevitable, as we are discussing here.

          It seems to me that a viable solution — created and already used by BSA for this exact problem — is sitting there right in front of us. Set up a parallel Scouting program within Learning for Life. It will be fully inclusive, meaning that it would not only welcome gays, but also girls and atheists — a triple play. We already have a full-blown program that will just need some tweaking to account for the membership differences. We already have the infrastructure for a complete national program. Out of respect for the concerns of the more conservative folks remaining in the traditional BSA program, there would _not_ be “joint” activities (camporees, roundtables, adult leader training) at the local level; summer camps would do what they could to separate the two programs. Both programs would have Eagle Scouts.

          And we keep everyone in the BSA family. Seems better to me than a huge membership loss.

          Difficult, yes, but not as difficult as building new programs from scratch.

    • I think BSA should do what is right and not sweat over the membership.

      If BSA would have looked at dominant popular culture of 1910, and restricted BSA membership to only those who were a part of that culture, BSA never would have grown the way it did.

      Don’t worry about pleasing the public, or even current members. Do the right thing, and the members will follow.

      • If you really believe that cwgmpls then build your own organization with the oaths, laws, and principles you believe in and see if a membership grows. I believe you really don’t believe that or this is what you or someone else would have already done. This is all about hijacking the BSA to create a wrongful spirit of acceptance of the militant homosexual agenda. If the homos are successful in stealing the BSA and creating some sort of false acceptance of their wrongful behaviors then they’ll use the BSA to beat over the heads of the Baptist Church, Methodist Church, Presbyterian Church (American), and Catholic Church in a similar fashion that the Presbyterian’s (USA), Lutheran’s, Episcopaleans, etc. are being used to beat over the heads of the BSA today. I hope you do the right thing and be at least true to yourself and leave the BSA alone and set out to build what you believe will be actractive to parents who want a safe, wholesome, Godly organization for their sons where they can be confident their children will be protected from harmful people who would have a desire to be harmful to them. The BSA strives to do this more than any other large organization I know. Do you really think the members are going to follow you? It would Shock the heck out of me. Shock me; I dare you to try.

        • I joined an organization the with the oaths, laws, and principles I believe in, in 1974. I stuck with it, and earned Eagle Scout in 1979. The oaths, laws, and principles I believe in remain the same today. BSA has done just fine with the oaths, laws, and principles it was founded on. There is no reason it can’t continue to do so in the future.

    • I hope the policy change is rejected and the BSA retains the level of expectation it has for membership which aligns with the oath and law scouts are going to take when they join. Wouldn’t make much sense to change the membership policy and invite youth and adults to join and then expect them to take an oath that contradicts the invitaion you made for them now would it. The scouts will be fine if the membership policy isn’t changed; why wouldn’t it. The reason it will be fine if the policy isn’t changed is because whatever reasons parents have of wanting their children involved in scouting today is going to be the same reasons parents are going to want their children involved in scouting in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years and beyond. If you change the policies and principles of the organization your stealing that opportunity for youth to aspire to the standards set forth by scouting today. These are timeless values for every new modern day.

      Scouting will always have its ups and downs with regard to membership and what’s going on in our American Culture. There will be a day when the major mass media’s attempts to dictate a wrongful American culture becomes more revealed; more of their lies revealed. When that day comes they will be replaced with a more truthful media; the change is already beginning. Does anybody remember after 9/11 how the major mass media even crumbled and knew not to bash our American Spirit of Freedom and they began singing God Bless America and supporting that prayerful people should pray to God for America again. Then time passed and they got back on their political bandwagon and started controlling our minds again by only allowing what they wanted to dictate to us to be broadcast. They are truly the evil ones in this day and age of our history. They are the bullhorn, the conduit, for all that is wrongful to have a voice to terrorize the majorities and try to control the silent majority to believe this and that is right and that this and that is wrong and if your not with what they tell you your supposed to be with then your an outsider and wrongful in what you think and believe. They are the whole reason our culture and society is upside down in many ways; what was wrongful and sinful is struggling to become the righteous and what was righteous is being called wrongful and sinful. Beware of that and how that media control is trying to change and destroy scouting; trying to change and destroy the USA.

      But a couple of things are for sure. God is in control of everything ultimately. There will be another day when our enemies will be successful in attacking us and murdering large numbers of people and causing tremendous devastation; Boston!! There will also be a day when our media will be forced by the American people to surrender their biased manipulation of truths and their political agenda to steal our freedoms and change our country to serve everyone else in the world except the ones their supposed to serve; AMERICANS. Everything has a season; its time. And the defenders of our American Freedoms will come out of the Godly people that are the real backbone of this country. The defenders of our Freedoms will come out of the BSA ranks too just as they have for more than a hundred years now. We have a responsibility to the children of today and the children to be born Americans in the future. We have a responsitlity to preserve everything that is right about America today and to prepare these next generations to “Be Prepared” to defend their freedoms and everything that is going to be right about the USA in their modern days to come. You don’t throw away everything that’s right and expect to make everything “better”. Build on what’s right and fix what’s wrong and this policy is not wrong for the mission the BSA is fulfilling for this nation.

      I keep hearing that there are homosexuals active in the BSA today; fine. If that’s true then I really see no reason to change the policy; why? The only purpose I could imagine would be a wrongful purpose of encouraging open homosexual behaviors and PDA’s to be exhibited throughout all BSA functions; exhibitionism. That’s all inappropriate anyway so why change the policy to make all of that more appropriate or tempting.

      Leave the policy unchanged and continue to operate with the principles traditionally known by everyone in the world what it means to say your a member of the BSA or your an Eagle Scout from the BSA; Its held with regard as a distinction of honor. People that want that for their children will have the opportunity to have that and people that want something else for their children can seek what they desire from other organizations or they are certainly free to follow their dreams and create an organization that they feel is desirable to enough people to sustain its existence; the BSA’s successfully done that by being who they are today.

  7. I’m still trying to understand what Scouts who want to preserve the 1991 policy statement that “homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the requirement in the Scout Oath that a Scout be morally straight” “homosexuals do not provide a desirable role model for Scouts” are trying to accomplish.

    Please help me understand this.

    Do people who want to preserve the 1991 policy want to

    A) Ensure that their sons, and the boys in their troop, will never be lead by an openly homosexual adult, and will never encounter an openly homosexual boy in their troop?

    B) Ensure that all troops everywhere in the country are never lead by an openly homosexual adult, and that no openly homosexual boys are members of BSA anywhere?

    C) Send a strong and clear message to all Scouts, and to the rest of the country, that BSA believes that homosexual conduct is immoral and homosexual adults cannot be good role models for youth.

    D) Prevent BSA from being used as a platform to advocate for homosexual rights, and ensure that BSA never teaches that homosexual behavior is normative, acceptable behavior.

    E) Something else that I am missing?

    These strike me as several different things. I’m guessing there are various ways to address all of the above. But I don’t think we can have a productive conversation, and understand each others point of view, if we don’t have a common understanding of what we are trying to accomplish.

    Can someone help me out by clarifying which of the above it is hoped would be accomplished by maintaining BSA’s 1991 policy statement? Thanks.

  8. A lot of opinion floating around here. The growth or decline of the BSA is not the issue. If this passes then they have violated the oath and law. They will have broken faith with all those who came before them. The BIG 3 have already shown their true colors. They are selling our values for the funds that basically pay there retirement and salaries. Growth to them is MONEY not values and virtue. Either we stand for morals or we don’t. The folks can be nice, smart, helpfull or whatever but it is immoral. BSA is not a fan of cigarettes, cigars, dip, alcohol etc. but they are going to ask me to be fine and accepting of a life style that leads to eventual death or at minimum disease. BSA can not win this but they can stand and die on the HIGH GROUND.

    • Money does seem to be a major factor. In talking with my local scout executives, they are all concerned whether or not they will have a job when the dust settles regardless of the outcome of the vote.

      I do find it a great shame that BSA has not been more proactive in protecting and promoting the good name and image of BSA.

      What were Woodward and Bernstein instructed to do?
      Follow the money

      Leaders of the Scouts, based in Irving, sometimes travel first class, have memberships at private clubs and airport clubs, and the CEO earns more than $1 million in salary and compensation.

      “This is crazy. This is just crazy. First class tickets. Country clubs, Admirals Club? This is ridiculous,” said Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, which provides independent analysis of non-profit organizations.

      All charities are required to file a federal tax return that’s “open to public inspection.” The Scouts’ most recent report is for 2008. In it, WFAA found the Scouts’ chief executive, Robert Mazzuca, was paid $1.16 million in salary and other compensation.

      That’s 2.5 times more than his counterpart at the Girl Scouts, who took $453,000 home.

      “That is very, very, very unusual,” Berger said.

      The Scouts, who responded to WFAA in writing, say that its board “engages third-party executive compensation specialists to make recommendations regarding competitive compensation arrangements for like services in other organizations.”

      • That’s all very interesting. Seems the BSA needs to make some serious changes but not in the membership policy. How do the members take the organization back?

  9. The LDS statement makes clear that the pending proposal is acceptable because they are okay with gay youth under a strict code of behavior, but adults is a whole different deal. I think many will view adoption of the pending proposal as the first step in acceptance of open homosexuals in BSA, and it won’t be long before the ban is lifted for adults as well — a view that is contrary to the LDS conditional approval. If the pending youth-only proposal is passed, is there — realistically — any way to hold the line there?

    • What were the chances of the proposed policy passing if the LDS had said “no”? I’d say about zero.

      What is the chance that the LDS church would ever allow openly gay men into Scouting? I’d say about zero.

      Those who don’t want openly gay adults in BSA have nothing to worry about, now or in the future. The LDS church has their back. And standing right beside them is the Roman Catholic church. Their position on gay adults will not change. Ever.

      There is no risk of allowing gay adults into Scouting. It will never happen. The only risk is BSA losing its nonsectarian foundation. Now that we know who calls the shots, it is clear that has already been lost.

      • I don’t think the pending proposal will pass, even with LDS’s consent, It isn’t like they are enthusiastically endorsing it, after all. But if it did pass, I think lifting the ban entirely is not far behind, despite the opposition of the major churches. It might come as a result of a lawsuit, it might come simply as a result of executive board turnover over time, but probably it is going to come just because there is no logic in allowing gay youth but not gay adults.

        What is the difference to the program and to the youth in the program between an openly gay adult leader and an openly gay 17-year-old Senior Patrol Leader? What is the difference between a 20-year-old openly gay Venturer and a 20-year-old openly gay Assistant Scoutmaster? Imagine an openly gay Boy Scout who completes all of his Eagle rank requirements up through the Scoutmaster conference on the day before his 18th birthday. He’ll be having his Eagle Scout board of review at the same time he’s not fit to be an adult member of BSA. There isn’t any logic there, and I think everyone knows that.

        Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the homosexual issue will not be settled, and we’ll just be in a holding action waiting for the event that will cause the LDS and other major churches and conservative institutions to drop BSA.

        I suggest that what we should be thinking about is a way to both keep the churches and have a fully inclusive program. That won’t happen with some compromise like the pending proposal or the local option. But maybe it can come through restructuring BSA.

        • I agree the proposal is fundamentally nonsense. As if something magical happens the moment a boy turns from 17 to 18.

          Still, the LDS backing is more than enough nudge to push it through. The prayer of every executive council member for every night for the last six months is how they can tell the world they are doing something to welcome gays into BSA, without pissing off the Mormons and Catholics at the same time. Now they’ve found their magical, nonsensical policy that just might do the trick.

          Maybe we can set up a betting website in the Cayman Islands and put money on it?

        • I agree Dan. What I am hearing is they said it to deflect the most rabid attacks from the left and explain the member policy of the Church toward homosexuals but that is speculation I am sure.

    • John, thank you for posting the link. I didn’t know what the “Uni-sex” Scout link was and just now read it. It is excellent and all posters here should read it.

      This is the last part and spot on for our discussion:

      “He (father) notes with wry irritation that Luke’s teachers are apt to wag their fingers at perfectly innocent things, like cupcakes in a lunchbox, but will cheer when a boy publicizes his entry into the bizarre and self-destructive.

      But it isn’t just the pitfalls that the father is thinking of. It occurs to him that the Boy Scouts and he have come to an impasse. There is no reconciling them. The Boy Scouts now proclaim that there is nothing to being a boy, and nothing to the boy’s becoming a man; they might as well be the Unisex Scouts, as they are in Canada, where the scouting movement has collapsed.

      In other words, Luke’s father is being asked to enroll his son in a group specifically limited to boys, but one that does not recognize the nature of boyhood and its progress to manhood. Thus there is no real justification for the group; that its membership is male is accidental and not of the essence. He and they do not see the same being in Luke. He sees his boy, and the man-to-be; they see a neuter. He sees a father-in-training; they see an immature human thing, a bundle of appetites that are not in themselves subject to moral judgment.

      What is the father supposed to do? He can recall that better time, that healthier time, and can name several boys he knew who, if they were boys today, would inevitably be enticed, by loneliness or a trick of the lewd or boredom or a desperate need to be noticed or a despair that they could ever become true men, into the life of the male forever seeking the male.

      He knows that most of them weathered the storms, precisely because the assumption that a boy is a boy gave them protection, some breathing space, some time to sort out their feelings and to grow up. He wants for Luke some small survival of that better time.

      Where can Luke’s father turn? To the only institution left standing that affirms the goodness of human nature, both masculine and feminine. Grace perfects nature, said Thomas Aquinas. In this time, grace is needed merely to recognize that there is a nature to begin with. In this time, it is impossible to raise any real man without trying to raise a godly man. This is not icing. It is of the essence of manhood and womanhood.

      Luke will know, if but intuitively, that his calling as a Christian, to leave his selfishness behind, to enter what Saint Paul calls the glorious liberty of the children of God, implies the just use of his sexual powers: to give, if God calls him, his body and his heart forever to the woman he loves. That won’t teach him how to pitch a tent in the woods. It might teach him how to build a home in a wasteland.

      Anthony Esolen is Professor of English at Providence College in Providence, Rhode Island, and the author of Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child and Ironies of Faith. He has translated Tasso’s Gerusalemme liberata and Dante’s The Divine Comedy.

    • Nice try, that’s why they take the vote. At least my Mormon friend s voting the will of the Council which is to not approve. Let’s let the vote happen.

      What does cwgmpls stand for anyway? Is it an acronym?

  10. Wallace, According to the Executive Summary of the report:

    “They estimate a membership policy change that includes both youth and adults could cause the BSA to incur membership losses in a range from 100,000 to 350,000. It is believed any gain in membership because of a change to the membership policy related to youth and adults would be in the range of 10,000 to 20,000 youth.”

    And one point to remember, that the original proposal was for the policy to be punted to the local councils. This policy change – especially as it is worded – is going to come across as the “Key 3” trying to shove their agenda down the local councils’ throats. At least in my opinion.

    If those numbers are anywhere near accurate, even the BEST case shift in membership will be devastating.

    You know, the principle of being “morally straight” has nothing to do with sexual preference. It has to do with things like integrity and rightness before God. Taking the narrow road rather than the wide road and not compromising on principles or character. In this the Executive Council has completely let us down.

  11. Reading through everyone’s comments here, you all seem to be fighting each other. There are personal attacks on each other, there are attacks on each others CO’s, there are attacks on the BSA, and attacks on religion.

    It doesn’t matter what faith you follow, doesn’t each of our gods teach us in one way or another to love one and another, to love thy neighbour, to treat another as you would want o be treated.

    Isn’t there a parallel between scouting and religion teaching trust, respect understanding. Get a group of people together give then a law or policy, some will agree, some will object, and some will sit on the fence. We all need to learn to respect each other, we all have equal rights.

    Scouting isn’t a place to teach religion to our kids. Religion isn’t like teaching a kid how to tie a knot, religion belongs in the family unit, not in the Troop, not in the Den, not at the campsite. Let the parents teach religion to their kids, let us show the kids what scouting is all about.

    Put “OUT”, back into “scOUTing”

  12. For background– I am a devout, Bible studying, believing, and living, born-again, saved LDS Christian, from a family with 4 sisters (no brothers), now the mother of two boys and a daughter. Our younger son isn’t yet of scouting age. Our older son (a young teen) has decided against participating in our congregation’s outdoorsy and sporting (the majority of our) scouting activities because he has some developmental issues that make outdoor and athletic activities not just difficult, but painful, un-enjoyable, and non-productive for him. He is willing to forgo the accompanying patches, rank advancements, and awards, in spite of great social pressure to achieve them. We support his independence from social pressure and his involvement in church and scouting service projects, social activities, and the like which are of interest and important to his development as a Christian young man. Our church doesn’t need scouting for that. We believe he can grow to be a good, productive, involved, loyal citizen of the U.S. without scouting as well. And I look forward to the day the LDS church ends its affiliation with an organization that is expensive, time consuming, hierarchical in non-Christian ways, and which addresses the needs of many, maybe even a majority of boys, but not all. When used by church organizations, it creates the perception that in order to be righteous, a boy must also be into scouting. And that’s just hogwash. It also creates a gender divide, as (has been pointed out) GSA simply doesn’t have the moral underpinnings harmonious with religious organizations to be compatible.

    All of that said, I think the distinction the newly proposed policy is trying to make is that temptation is different than sin, and church (and scouting programs used by churches) policies should reflect that. In the LDS church, celibate homosexuals may serve in any church function but only when they are living and teaching in accordance with church (and scriptural) teachings. Regardless of the outcome of this particular BSA policy proposal, I hope that churches will end their affiliation with BSA and create their own activity programs for youth (boys and girls). The LDS church has done so internationally. There is no reason it can’t do so here in the U.S. as well.

    • LDS teachings about homosexuals have no more to do with Scouting than Muslim teachings about women, or Catholic teachings about the Eucharist, or Lutheran teachings about salvation. Those are sectarian teachings which are outside the bounds of traditional Scouting.

  13. I am a Scoutmaster in Madison, WI and a life-long Scout and Brotherhood OA member. Over the past three months I have read the many, many blog posts where membership policy debates/discussions have led to divisive, derogatory and hateful statements which are directed at fellow Scouts and Scouters. Ladies and gentlemen, we must conduct ourselves in a more mature fashion and follow the Scout Oath and Law.

    Now, I am finally going to share my thoughts on this hot-topic issue.

    Many of those who are opposed to a change in membership policy cite the following reasons for their dissent:

    1. Homosexuality is seen as amoral in the eyes of God.
    2. Homosexual Scouts and Scouters are going to want to have sex with other Scouts and Scouters during camping trips and/or Scouting events.
    3. This is a political move on the part of an “agenda”.

    We can argue all day and night about whether or not homosexuality is amoral. What we have discussed over an over is that not all religious organizations agree on this point. Yes, many chartering organizations are churches but not all churches agree on the point of homosexuality being a sin in the eyes of God.

    The point that always astonishes me is that many argue that homosexual Scouts and Scouters are going to attempt to have sex with other Scouts and Scouters on camping trips. This is irrational fear, in my opinion. Female Scout leaders are not likely to have sex with other Scouts or Scouters on a camping trip yet we allow females to be leaders in the BSA. Likewise, I don’t believe homosexuals are lining up to join the BSA so they can have “relations” with folks of the same sex.

    I have noticed that many are quick to label this discussion as an attempt to “destroy Scouting” by those support “the gay agenda”. What exactly is the “gay agenda”? What we are witnessing today is the desire on the part of homosexuals to participate in the movement of Scouting as equal members.

    By denying membership to a young man or any adult based solely on the basis of sexual orientation, I believe we are depriving our youth of countless benefits. Who knows how many talented potential Scouters we are barring from membership in the BSA? Doctors, lawyers, pastors, nurses, salespersons, engineers, wildlife biologists, foresters, professors, farmers, etc.

    My point boils down to the fact that I don’t believe sexuality has a place in Scouting. What we are seeing is a focus on sex and sexuality rather than concentrating on providing an environment of growth through Scouting by allowing all to join our Packs, Troops, Teams and Crews..

    Yours in Scouting,

    Christopher Beaver
    Scoutmaster, Troop 29

    • Chris Beaver, Questions 4u. Do you think openly homosexual 17 year old scouts are more of a threat to molest a 12 or 13 year old homo or hetero scout than a 17 year old hetero scout? What is your answer based on? How should the BSA respond to the media when the first molestation or rape of boy in boy occurs and the media wants accountability on why the BSA changed their policy to allow the liklihood of this human tragedy to occur? What will the BSA do to protect the character and reputation of the Leader who will be held responsible and accountable for “allowing” this tragedy to occur? What will the scoutmaster say to the victims gamily after their child has been molested and raped and his young life has been ruined by this tragic sexual attack? How will the BSA be able to afford the legal fees to defend all the negligence cases brought against everyone involved in the lawsuits as a result of these assaults; we all know the wrath of some ambulance chasing lawyers? I wouldn’t think of the best case scenarios when trying to prepare for the worst case incidents that will happen eventually. Be a wise scout and “be prepared” for the likely reality of the worst case scenario; pass the policy change and its only a matter of time…. doesn’t take a crystal ball to see those truths unfolding.. Just look at the world today…

      • Folks, there are already gay leaders and scouts in scouting and yet we don’t have the “sky is falling” situation that a few here suggest. Likewise the YMCA which is an inclusive Christian organization does not either. They have camp outs too and have managed to figure it out just like scouting has in other parts of the world. We can too, the models already exist.

        • Do you honestly believe there have never been a problems with homosexuals and heterosexuals in the YMCA camp outs? Before you say something so wreckless why don’t you do some research Todd Kunze? And for all the scouts that were molested or raped in the BSA by hetero or homosexual scouts don’t you think their sky fell and they’ll live with the tragic attack and the trauma it created in their soul for the rest of their life on this earth. Now is the time to prevent the sky from falling for the boy who will be the first victim of molestation or rape directly related to changing the membership policy and allowed the homosexual pedophile to openly join the BSA. Will the BSA choose to openly welcome these predators into the organization where their behavior will result in the tragic victimization of boys between the ages of 10 to 17? How many molestations or rapes will be too many before the membership policy is changed back or the BSA faces loosing all members because parent will withdrawl their children? I say one is too many. And who normally pays the rechartering fee for the boy scout? I’m going to venture to say that
          %99.999+ its the parent. Their not going to enroll their son in an orgainization that knowingly has a membership policy that allows openly homosexual boys and men to leark in their ranks.

      • Thank you, Mr. Wallace, for your response. However, I believe your comment fits in with my second point that many exhibit an irrational fear that homosexual members are going to want to have sex with other members of the unit. I firmly believe this is a non-issue if membership changes comes to pass later this month. Also, we have already seen that sexual abuse has occurred in the BSA and this was not because of homosexuality. Rather, it was the result of pedophilia.

        • Wouldn’t it be foolish LeCastor to believe that homosexual boys wouldn’t be attracted to other members of their troop. Wouldn’t it be foolish to believe that teenage homosexual boys with the raging hormones of a teenager wouldn’t be more likely to find a target for their homosexual desires within their troop than possibly other places in their social networks? Am I supposed to believe that homosexual boys are saintly now and that they will not feel sexual desire toward those they sexually desire; boys and men? Human sexuality is deeply rooted within all of us; a core drive within all of us whether hetero or homo. If your a homosexual 17 year old scout and my son is an attractive 14 year old hetero scout then do you think I’m going to be worried as a parent that my son is under your supervision and a subordinate possibly in your patrol or certainly in your troop if your an Eagle Rank and he’s a first class scout. If you made advances toward my son because you misunderstood something he might have done or said to lead you to believe he was interested in you sexually then would it be wrongful for my son to defend himself; should he have to deal with this issue in the BSA; a place he thought he had sanctuary from this type of behavior? Homosexual boys and adults should simply find other organizations where they can knowingly be together if that’s their desire. The BSA has decided they are not that place…. never have been…

    • Christopher Beaver you are right about hateful comments they are unnecessary and doesn’t help the move the cause along but this is America today and we have to live with it unfortunately. The big problem is division and that is what the National Board has caused. They should have left the issue of homosexuality alone. There was no way they could to solve it and there was no way the majority of Scoutleaders would except it. I believe that the National Board was trying to find a way to gain more support from pressure from the Fortune 500 Companies that have funded the BSA for years. Those companies have come to the point of telling the BSA to change its policies on homosexuals and legally allow them in or they would no longer finance the BSA. This is a true tragedy and definately un- American. What if the customers of these companies stopped patronizing them if they did not stop promoting homosexuals. The shoe would be on the other foot and it would lead to financial warfare. There are statements that say Scouting is not a religious organization Iwill leave that up to the future. I say the the BSA should not be a politIcal correct organization. Christopher the blogs were necessary even though divisive and at times as you state hateful to allow a overall consenses of the future of the BSA. After 103 years the BSA has proven itself as the greatist youth organization in the United States and across the World. I see no timeless values in changing the core values of the BSA. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

      • “They should have left the issue of homosexuality alone”

        I wholeheartedly agree. Starting around 1984, it was a fools errand for churches to think they could interject teaching about homosexuality into the core values of BSA. It has been nothing but trouble for BSA ever since.

        Get back to the timeless, core values of the Scout Oath and Law, and leave sex out of Scouting. That is the only way forward for BSA.

    • I’d like to clarify my positions in response to your post. I, too am a Scoutmaster in Georgia and long-time Brotherhood member of the OA.

      I agree with you that we all should maintain a civil discourse. There are several posters on here that I disagree with completely but we have been able to stay mostly civil. I a posters gets gets overly strident in their opinion, I sometimes respond to that and I work on that but it is a volatile issue with clearly defined moral objections both sides support. But, we should maintain civility if at all possibel.

      Christopher Beaver said: “1. Homosexuality is seen as amoral in the eyes of God.”

      I think you meant to say “immoral” in the eyes of God and conservatives who follow the Bible literally. I think the progressives on this list think amoral may well be a virtue that homosexuals adhere to in their persona.

      Definition of AMORAL
      1a : being neither moral nor immoral; specifically : lying outside the sphere to which moral judgments apply
      b : lacking moral sensibility
      2: being outside or beyond the moral order or a particular code of morals

      I think some of the more liberal posters seell homosexuality as amoral and not subject to a determination of morality by others

      Christopher Beaver said:2. “Homosexual Scouts and Scouters are going to want to have sex with other Scouts and Scouters during camping trips and/or Scouting events.”

      I only see this as a potential problem for “promiscuous open and avowed homosexuals.” I don’t think anybody knows what will happen if you throw open and avowed homosexuals together in a tent in the woods. A boy and girl would probably end up having sex if they promiscuous. Growing up and not a Scout, that was not that uncommon as a teenager but looking back it was not a positive thing for the boy or the girl and no morals are values were attempted to be taught in that scenario. But, it would be foolish to believe it is not possible and as a Scoutmaster, I do not want my checklist to include the possibility when Scouts are bedding down for the night. Just not in my orbit and I do not want it there. So, I clarify I don’t expect orgies but once is way too many times for me and I believe such a possibility is not in the best interests of Youth or Scouting.

      Christopher Beaver said: “3. This is a political move on the part of an “agenda”.”

      I absolutely believe this is true on behalf of some Scouters and non-Scouters. I have also said that we all have an “agenda.” we all support certain morals and values and will promote and defend those on sites such as this. I don’t see how you couldn’t believe that watching the wa the homosexual community and activists have forced inclusion in so many other organizations.

      Christopher Beaver said: “My point boils down to the fact that I don’t believe sexuality has a place in Scouting. What we are seeing is a focus on sex and sexuality rather than concentrating on providing an environment of growth through Scouting by allowing all to join our Packs, Troops, Teams and Crews..”

      How can you have “open avowed” homosexuals and not have sexuality in Scouting. BSA is just asking us to live with it and handle no matter our personal beliefs of the beliefs of our CO. I posted on another thread the following:

      > The interpretation Mike wrote correcting me, and was subsequently confirmed by
      > the national teleconference last night and a posting by BSA’s counsel, states
      > that a unit must take a youth who applies as an openly homosexual youth, and
      > must do so even if the CO specifically prohibits that behavior/orientation.

      So, I’m out. My CO is out. My Scouts and parents are out because we asked and they do not want “open avowed” homosexuals in their Unit being held up to their children as role models. To stay, they will have to conform to the new Policy under any and all circumstances according to BSA legal. So, who has been denied Scouting?

      Fred Cooper

      • BSA will collapse; in time. and that would be right. It will be God’s hand in making sure something He had a hand in creating collapses from our disobedience. It won’t be the end of it though. The spirit will still be there and from the ashes will come something better. There doesn’t have to be a BSA; it was a blessing given to all if us by Him through the Holy Spirit working through so many dedicated volunteers who gave so much to the movement. Homosexuals will steal and hijack it and beat God and Godly people over the head with it claiming some sort of perverted victory. Good luck with that strategy leading to hell… I hope a lot of people resign but one thing is for sure; the boys will be the judges in the end when it comes time to charter. Silly to have a youth program with no youth. Think a teenage boy’s going to want to be associated with the BSA ehen their reputation becomes perverted to mean the homo scouts. I was a boy once; long time ago. I’m not stupid about what boys think and I know their not going to become associated with an organization known to have openly homo boys in it. It’ll all be about the first homo boy to do this or that and the media will shove it all down our cultures throat and the boys will quickly become disassociated. Their boys; they’ll be the ultimate judges, juries and executioners… “be prepared”

    • Why do we pay so much attention to what the LDS church says about gays? Why don’t we pay the same attention to what the Muslim faith says about pork? BSA is *nonsectarian*. It should not matter, one whit, to BSA, what LDS teaches about anything.

      We should respect everything that every church teaches. But we should not be paying attention to it when trying to form BSA policies.

      • cw, I agree with u on one thing you agreed to do; you should respect the members of the Christian Faith and be tolerant of our beliefs. You should discontinue your bigotry and be thankful for the contributions Christians have made to the BSA, and this Nation. You should discontinue your racist attacks against Christians and hetero people in general. You should respect the wishes of the majority and stop terrorizing the BSA membership with your anti American speech trying to limit constitutional freedoms. This is a battle you and your homo militant activists will never win; you have no real voice and you have no real supporters.. you are humurous 2 me; manipulative, controlling and a liar…

        • I am thankful for all of the contributions Christians have made to BSA. Particularly their decision, from the beginning, to include all people of faith into BSA equally. This openness to all faiths and religions is what allowed Jews, Universalists, Muslims and others to contribute greatly to BSA form the beginning, and what allowed BSA to grow throughout the 20th century, a time which saw enormous shifts in U.S. religious life. Through it all, BSA continued to grow, because BSA was nonsectarian at its care.

          But as great as the contributions of Christians have been, as far as I know, no Christian church has bought BSA, and no Christian church owns BSA today. Correct me if I am wrong.

          Since Christians do not own BSA, and BSA remains nonsectarian as it has from the beginning, we can expect BSA to keep sectarian religious teachings out of Scouting.

      • It matters for practical reasons. Since the LDS church is one of the major sponsors of Scouting units, their official (and/or unofficial) opinion carries weight.

        I agree with you that it shouldn’t necessarily matter, but it does.

        IMHO, you are correct. We don’t ban bacon from camporee menus because it would offend Jews or Muslims. We don’t do away with camp medics because Christian Scientists don’t accept doctors. We don’t ban women or make them wear head scarves because of Sharia restrictions. We leave for camp on Friday, even though that’s not allowed in some religions; and we return on Sunday, even though that doesn’t work for some.

        What we do say is that if you don’t want bacon, don’t eat it. If you need to wear a head covering (scarf or yarmulke), wear it. If you need to come to camp on Saturday morning, do so. If you need to leave Sunday night, that’s fine. If you prefer not to go to the hospital if you have an accident, note it on the medical form.

        That’s respecting and tolerating other religions. I respect your religious beliefs by allowing you to practice them, not by following them myself.

        (That wasn’t pointed at you specifically, but at several others on this board who seem to take the tact that respecting their religioun requires universal adoption of their beliefs.)

        • And if you don’t like gays, walk the other way when you see one coming. Don’t impose your religious beliefs on others.

      • For me it was not about the church but about the content of the article. It matters not who published it. I would have referenced whichever church that wrote that article. I was hoping to find more articles supporting this half proposal by other churches to post as well.

        • Of course the LDS church is going to support this new half-proposal. It reads like an Introduction to Mormon Sex Education class. The core teachings about Mormon sexual morality are there.

          My question is, why do we have any teachings about sexual morality in Scouting? And if we are going to have sex teachings, why do Mormons get to pick which ones? Why not Lutherans, or Episcopalians?

          I’d like to see a list of the churches that have a voice with the BSA executive committee. BSA is *nonsectarian*. Why is it listening to any of them?

        • I agree cwgmpls. I hope there are no religious organizations with a say in this “proposal” or the vote involved in the membership policy.

          Yesterday for the first time I had a conversation with the Troop CC and he feels that the policy will pass. He did say that he supports inclusion.

  14. cwgmpls-

    You represent equality well on this site. This straight, assistant scoutmaster, merit badge counselor, scouting parent is glad you are on the side of equality. Your tone is to be commended, and the merit of your position shines in comparison to those offered in support of bigotry.

    My two cents: we allow overweight people, divorced people, heterosexual adulterer, liars- all sorts of “sinners.” But we don’t extent that same courtesy to gay people, and that’s wrong. Every major faith tradition honors the concept of extending kindness and love to everyone- and especially sinners. So no matter what you think of homosexuality, there is no good reason to exclude them unless we’re going to start applying that standard equally by kicking out every overweight, divorced volunteer in the organization.

    And we’re not going to do that, are we? Because that will impact people that we respect. People who have made mistakes. People that may act differently than WE do because they have different values. But we welcome them because they are more than the sum of their mistakes. They have something offer, and we have something to give.

    Why not extend the same courtesy, kindness, and compassion to homosexuals that we do to heterosexuals? What would Jesus do?

    • Good points. But I’m not sure BSA has to be asking about Jesus, any more than it asks about Allah or the Pope. But I’m sure your point will resonate with Christians among us.

    • Sean, cwgmpls is not the nicest guy on this list and neither am I so please don’t make a blanket statements condemning everybody but him. So, you think we’re all bigots also. Refuge in name-calling has been tried here many times. Your position is just as bigoted against free expression of religious beliefs.

      That must be some happening Troop if you allow all those actively fallen people to participate as leaders and an understanding CO as well. The leaders of the Troop and CO approved them so whose fault is that? They would not be in our Troop. Most of the sinners you mention do not define themselves by their sexuality as homosexuals do. Overweight people don’t want to share fat with you. An active adulterer would not be in a Troop that has peer review for leaders,

      Open, avowed Homosexuality is a behavior that I do not believe should be in Scouting. Its not morally straight or clean in my opinion. None of us are perfecta and allow for folks to repent from sin but as best as I can tell, open and avowed means they are engaging in the behavior.

      I think its clear what Jesus would do. he followed the Law of Moses which called homosexuality immoral. His appointed Apostle Paul clearly stated what God wanted said after Jesus died and rose again. It is very clear that it is immorality. Do not live in it. Go and sin no more.

      • Fred,
        I must confess that I am not a biblical scholar. You site the law of Moses and the writings of Paul the Apostle. As you say it is clear what Jesus would do, can you tell us what He had to say on the subject of homosexuality, or what He did about it when He walked among us?

        • You’re late to the party. Its been posted several times by me and others on this thread. Juts read the thread an you will find it.

      • Fred,
        I just read everything you posted to the beginning of this thread. I see reference to the Old Testament and to Paul’s epistles. I can’t seem to find what Jesus himself actually said about homosexuality in the 3 decades he was here on earth. Did he have a policy excluding homosexuals from the ranks of his disciples? I’m not asking what would Jesus do. I’m asking what DID Jesus do, so that we can have His example to guide us in this decision.

        • Brian I can answer that in one paragraph he followed the will and teachings of his Father and our Father God himself. Maybe one day you can ask Jesus Christ himself on Judgement day when it will be to late. Jesus is ready for us will the homosexuals be ready for him.Trenton Spears

        • Trenton,
          If we are to believe that the will and teachings of
          his Father are contained in the Old Testament, then how do we explain Jesus stopping the crowd from stoning an adulteress, as prescribed by God’s law. This is the closest thing I can see in the gospels of Jesus’ actions and words regarding issues of a sexual nature. I believe his response was to let he who is without sin cast the first stone. By His words and actions, I do not see my Lord and savior asking me to sit in judgement of homosexuals. If you think that this is the only sin so abominable that it needs a special rule banning the sinners from scouting, I am wondering why do you think Jesus never brought up this issue during his days on earth. He said a lot about loving thy neighbor, not sitting in judgement. He also said whatever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me. I will be happy to speak to the Lord on judgement day about how I treated his homosexual children with the same love and respect as his other children. I wish you and all of God’s children nothing but the best.

        • Jesus the Mesiah came to fulfill His Word not to change it. That’s what Jesus himself described to be His purpose. He came to show sinners the way to everlasting life in heaven with God and Himself; forgiveness through His blood sacrifice being the only way. Open homosexuals are simply not welcome in the BSA by the vast majority of its members for a broad array if reasons with the least not being Youth Protection. Doesnt mean I’m hateful, intolerant, a bigot or a racist. Just means I don’t like homosexuality and I don’t want it in the BSA. Discussing it is even repulsive to me although talking about it might give a homo a kick of some sort? Its ok that I honestly feel that homosexual men are repulsive to me; its a natural feeling of a hetero man. Most men (99%+) are not homosexual and are repulsed by homosexual behavior too. To pretend homosexual behavior isn’t sinful is a mistake. There are good reasons for someone to choose to mold their lives to biblical principles whether hetero or homo. If you choose to want to live a life in a close relationship with God then you have to freely choose to read His Word, Ask the Holy Spirit into your heart through Baptism and ask for forgiveness for sinful behavior. If your prayerful and are truly seeing answers to your questions you’ll find them by listening to the Holy Spirit uf you’ve freely chosen to accept baptism and be born if a new spirit. His Holy Spirit is free and your free to choose His Spirit. U can be a homosexual and a Christian but but you have to surrender sin in your life and ask forgiveness to be saved. Can’t change Biblical principles.

  15. Brian We could spent a lot of time dicussing the teachings of Jesus Christ and God the Father. What is most important is that Jesus Christ after he stopped the stoning of Mary Madaline he said to her repent and sin no more which means she had broken Gods laws and would face his judgement some day and be judged according to the laws of God based on the saving ordinance of repenting. Brian what needs to be observed is the BSA is trying to allow homosexuals into a program that the homosexuals will have a hard time repenting of and many will most likely keep practicing the sin. Supporting Gods teachings is in no way judgemental or bigotry. Brian I think you will admit as a Christian that there is a judgement day that all Christians will face. Brian we are placing our youth in harms way with the new proposal by the National Board. I believe that the homosexuals should start their own scout related program and form a basis so that they can practice according to their own beliefs if that is the issue. Equality can also be gained by any group if the desire is there. Forcing equality is not the American or Scouting way. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

    • Trenton Spears: “What is most important is that Jesus Christ after he stopped the stoning of Mary Madaline he said to her repent and sin no more which means she had broken Gods laws and would face his judgement some day and be judged according to the laws of God based on the saving ordinance of repenting.”

      Trenton, Mary Magdalene is not the woman whom Jesus saved from stoning. (She was not named in the Bible.) Mary Magdalene was a woman whom he cured through exorcism of the demons that possessed her, and who then became one of his followers. Nowhere in the Bible does it say she was the one being stoned or that she was guilty of any form of sexual immorality.

      • I saw what Trenton posted and I knew the theologian would come out in somebody. 😉

        I give Trenton the benefit of the doubt. His point is valid. NIce “straw man” though AZMIke. I hope you were just trying to help Trenton out.

        I have said many times that folks should follow through with the whole scripture. Jesus did in fact say “Go and sin no more.” I believe he would have said the same thing to the homosexual.

        The mistaken reference to Mary Magdalene is a fairly common one. Some doctrines believe that I have heard.

        • Yes, Jesus said sin no more. So am I to understand that only those that sin no more should be allowed in scouting? Who gets to judge what is a real sin or not and also if a sin really was committed? Whose religion do we go by in coming up with such definitions?

        • Todd K said: “Yes, Jesus said sin no more. So am I to understand that only those that sin no more should be allowed in scouting? Who gets to judge what is a real sin or not and also if a sin really was committed? Whose religion do we go by in coming up with such definitions?”

          Those living in sin should not be in Scouting. Adulterers, Open and avowed homosexuals, pedophiles, alcoholics, drug addicts, habitual liars and cheats. We all fail but those that fail habitually are not repentant and unfit to be Scout Leaders who should set an example for young men to follow.

          If sin is not readily apparent, then the moral code of the participants is undefined. The leadership of the organization of like-minded individuals defines the defining it. That is the struggle for the soul of the organization we are having. At present, the moral code (policy) of BSA excludes open and avowed homosexuals. I agree with it and it is compatible with biblical scripture.

          We do not follow a particular religion but a common moral code that as defined by BSA excludes homosexuals. The religion does not determine that, it only reinforces it according to the holy scripture of the religion of which the vast majority believe homosexuality is immoral.

          Seems clear to me. If er adopt the proposed policy, we lower the bar for teh moral code. People and organizations of high moral standards will leave. People accepting low moral standards will stay but will continue to agitate because their stand is not a principled one and they can stay involved with an organization they do not agree to continue to try to lower the moral standards. Seems clear to me.

        • Actually, those who will stay if the policy changes do have principals. They simply have different principals than you have.

        • Beth, I am entirely in agreement with your statement on differing principles as I stated in the reply.

        • Fred,
          You actually said “their stand is not a principled one” Not principled is quite a different thing from having different principles. I do have to give you points for using the word principle as apposed to principal, which we will have to agree applies to the leaders of the schools that our scouts attend 😉

        • I’m sorry for the confusion. I guess the best answer is; “Principled stand” is in the “eyes of the beholder”

        • Charles,
          In Matthew 19 1-8. Jesus said that once a man and woman become one flesh, what God has joined, let no man separate. Shall we now restrict divorced heterosexuals from the BSA, as they are not following God’s law as.. well I guess they are following the law of Moses that was NOT affirmed by Christ, but in fact changed by Christ. Unless we follow a Jewish tradition, Mathew 19 1-8 shows us that Christ did not uphold all of the law of Moses. Interesting, contradictory to those who say we must follow the Law of Moses (except for the parts about bacon, shrimp and other stuff we like) Of course the argument is those were things (dietary laws of God from the old testament) that most Christians now ignore were meant to keep the Jews heathy so their numbers would flourish as these thing back in the day could bring on disease. Hmm.. homosexuals also don’t increase are numbers as they do not reproduce…also important back in the day, but not so much now. Love one another..Thats a concept I can understand and I heard Christ say that many times, Love one another..who doesn’t feel good when he hears those words from God, but I never heard him gay bashing. Love all of Gods children, or sit in judgement of some and spew hatred. WWJD? I can’t understand how people can call themselves Christians and be so unlike Christ. I freely admit that I do not believe everything in the Bible. The pork thing, allowing slavery, subjugating women, you know the old testament stuff that Christ never went for. Paul was a good man, but not a perfect man, and you may think everything he said came straight from God, but I don’t see it. So what does scouting do? Is it fair to say the worst of the homosexuals are maybe not pedophiles but pederasts, even worse for us because they prey on teenagers, although AZMike tells us that ” Many homosexuals, and many heterosexuals, find teenagers attractive and seek to have sex with them without being considered “pedophiles.” They are just immoral ADULTS who would have sex with a teenager, in violation of moral, cultural, and legal standards. We seek to prevent this behavior by denying adults of any sexual orientation access to youths they would victimize, ” So I guess to be safe we should exclude the homosexuals AND the heterosexuals. And while we are at it, Didn’t those two Muslims in Boston but their pressure cooker bombs in backpacks. The last thing we need is Muslims with backpacks at a Jamboree. And despite AZMike’s praise of Pope Benedict…news flash…he is now Pope emeritus Benedict. Can we really be sure that Pope Francis will be able to keep all of those gay priests in check. We have our children to protect, so lets exclude Catholic churches from chartering scout organizations, because can we really expect scoutmaster Bob to tell Father Bruce that he can’t come on the next camping trip. Oh and while we are at it, Blacks and Hispanics, come on, they don’t even LOOK like us. Mormans, are we really sure they are not just waiting to get back into polygamy…how immoral is that!
          OK so no divorce people, homosexuals, heterosexuals, Catholics, Blacks, Hispanics, Mormans, I’m still on the fence about pork enthusiasts, and how did I forget the Jews who KILLED our Lord and Savior!
          Nah, I guess you guys are right..easier to just pick on the homosexuals, the only real sinners out there. OK lets vote!

        • We finally agree. Enough parsing and re-thinking and theological misdirection and enough bullcrap. Your ad hominem argument is ridiculous. Let’s vote!

          As I said at the beginning. BSA has sold out to the money interests and the least experienced and most immature Scouts for the future of Scouting. After reviewing the telecast of over and hour supporting their position and avoiding all negative Council, member and CO comments, they pushed forward their proposal. They do not those currently involved in Scouting now, they said so and are wiling to suffer significant losses in membership and CO’s to attract a more secular crowd with mre flexible values and morals. Time to take a stand and 1,400 delegates will decide for the rest of us. Join me on Sunday May 5 for:

        • “God hath showed me I should not call any man common or unclean.” Where is Luke today when we need him?

        • Are you seriously trying to equivocate Peter’s chastising of devout Jewish people who would not accept devout Gentiles with acceptance of immoral homosexual behavior? Stoop to no depths to defend your homosexual brothers I see. Perversion of Gospel will be dealt with severely by God you know.

        • I guess your are right Fred. God wants you to call my lesbian daughter, who He created, common and unclean. Sure glad we have fine Christians like you around to put us in our place. Interesting translation of “Love one another”

        • When these discussions first began, I really hoped that we could find common ground if we worked hard at it, if we talked and listened to each other. After all, we teach that kind of conflict resolution, along with the value of diversity and inclusion, at every single Wood Badge course. Finding common ground is part of who we are — arising as we did out of B-P’s dreams of a better world (for which see his reaction to the first World Jamboree).

          But I should have remembered from my years in seminary that there are faiths that are really not able to join in a truly nonsectarian fellowship. Depending on the faith, they may be able to cooperate within certain limits, but nonsectarian recognition of other faiths is contrary to central tenets of some faiths. It is painfully true that we will not be able to keep in our circle units that arise from these faiths, I think, if the policy changes.

        • You are correct Karen. I cannot sacrifice biblical principles as I see them after much study for nonsectarian secular cooperation purposes. I don’t think Wood Badge asked me to do that and I have served as participant and Troop Guide. Your soul and the souls of the young men under your charge should be handled as invaluable treasure. I disagree completely with your characterization of cooperation although I know you believe what you say is not harmful in any way.

        • Never said a word about your daughter, you did. I have no opinion about your daughter and you brought it up for effect. Sorry, not kind of a father to do so. Lesbianism is a form of homosexuality which I believe is the performance of an immoral sexual activity. The Bible states so also. I am sure you love you daughter and i would not bring her into this as a point of argument.

        • Consensual sexual relations between two committed adults of the same sex is now in the same league as murder. WOW! And no Fred I was not using the words of the scripture to defend my homosexual brothers, I was using God’s word to ask that we not call one of my children, and one of God’s children, common and unclean, immoral or perverted, choose your own hate word. God will judge morality. When man steps into this role it only causes hurt.

        • Excuse me Brian, but are you off your meds or something. I have not even mentioned murder. Immorality includes all types of Sin and yes it is immoral to mrder but I never said homosexuality rises to the level of murder. Try to stay focused on the matter at hand, whether open avowed homosexuals should be included in Scouting. I say not because I believe you cannot engage in homosexual behavior and be morally straight or clean.

          God will judge but it is my responsibility to challenge actions that portray sinful behavior as acceptable in an organization of high morals which I believe Scouting to be. You may not believe that ir true and that is fine. That is why we debate and vote.

          “If it feels good, do it” and “As long as it does not affect me, its fine” is for a purely secular society which is outside Scouting values, ideals and moral code.

          You are correct, God will judge, not I and I have never said I would, I expose error when I see it, the judgement is up to God. Surely you are not saying that when Jesus said “love one another” he meant excuse all sin before God without comment?

          I say plainly again, I have no comment in regards your daughter. I do not know her.

        • It appears that Brian was addressing two posts directed at him with a single reply, Another person equated homosexuality with murder.

          I must say, I find it peculiar that one of the people that accuses others of being unkind in this discussion uses statements like “you must be off your meds…” How very courteous indeed…

        • Ah geez. It was late when I replied to this one, I think… I do know the difference between principles and principals! 🙂

        • For what it’s worth, Deanna, I was offering a correction on a point of scripture, which may have been a slip of the memory on Trenton’s part. I happen to agree with the main point of his post – Jesus did not offer unconditional acceptance of every moral failing, he told those who had sinned not to continue in their behavior.

          If an adult’s or a youth’s self-desciption is that he is “gay,” it could mean that he feels a same-sex attraction, knows that it is wrong, tries to avoid the behavior associated with the attraction, and is trying to deal with it, as one deals with the poor eating habits associated with a genetic tendency to obesity or diabetes. More commonly, however, it means he defines himself by a continuing moral failing and sees nothing wrong with it, or feels it should be celebrated. If you are continuing in a moral failing in this way, you are not living according to the moral code of Scouting.

          Many of those arguing for inclusion of gay youths and adults have claimed that because some denominations have recently changed their doctrine to conform with a secular society’s new views, that this new interpretation is part of their religion, and so an acceptance and celebration of homosexual behavior must be accepted by the BSA as part of a “non-sectarian” stance. Homosexual behavior has been condemned by all major religions, in the western tradition and the eastern tradition. This is part of a basic view of morality that is shared by all traditional cultures, and so is non-sectarian. If a denomination were to discover a new interpretation of scripture that permitted, say, stealing or felonious murder (or to a lesser degree, say, resource destruction or cussing), we would not be required to accept that behavior within Scouting just because their religion now allows it in the name of “non-sectarianism.” The (very recent) additions to the beliefs of some religions that homosexual behavior is now to be accepted and celebrated is not part of the Moral Law, and while it may be part of their faith now, is not part of Scouting. The traditional basis of Moral Law, which is the basis of both western and eastern civilization, is, as seen by the men who founded Scouting.

          Moral Law is the knowledge of what is right and wrong with which we were all born, and which all established religions, each partly true in their own fashion with some perhaps having a greater knowledge of the Truth than others, include as part of their beliefs. Moral Law can be derived from logic and good reasoning, as well as the divine spark within us, and it will certainly lead us to a belief in moral behavior and a Supreme Being or Lawgiver. Each religion and denomination has beliefs (through divine revelation) which will involve the particulars and give what they consider the whole picture, needed for living a moral life. But the Moral Law informs the system of morality we use in Scouting, without involving sectarian teaching. You will not find a conflict with the broad basics of the Moral Law and the teachings of any established religion.

          If an individual culture contains an anomalously positive view of pederasty, for instance – such as the Spartans did – we can say that culture has gone off track and does not practice values that are consonant with the Moral Law.

          Moral Law tracks very nicely with happiness, by the way. When we follow Moral Law, even if it seems difficult, we are ultimately rewarded with a happier, more fulfilling life. If the behavior we are discussing is ultimately self-destructive (as I’ll discuss below), then it reinforces the belief that the behavior conflicts with Moral Law. Homosexuality conflicts with Moral Law.

          I don’t think the Local Option (which appears to be dead in the water) was a viable solution, as it left the door open to lawsuits against traditional COs and was widely unpopular with the base membership.

          I don’t think an Open Admission policy of admitting “avowed” (which I interpret as meaning “I’m proud of what I do and I’m not going to change”) homosexual or bisexual boys and adults is acceptable from a moral law standpoint or from a youth safety standpoint, based on historical experience – the disastrous Catholic experiment of allowing those with a same-sex attraction into the priesthood (now ended by Pope Benedict) if they promised to remain celibate was the chief cause of the sexual abuse scandal, which consisted of almost entirely homosexual abuse and involved victims that were almost entirely within the age range of Boy Scouting. (And it would be hard to argue that this was somehow caused by the horrific effects of “celibacy” in the priesthood – most people who are celibate, through their own choice or not, do not become pederasts, and many pederasts were never celibate for long periods before offending.)

          The rate of abuse in the Catholic Church has dropped to almost nothing as the result of the changes in seminary admissions, youth safety procedures (which parallels the BSA), and the administrative changes in how abuse complaints are handled (again, thanks to Pope Benedict, who demanded accountability from the Bishops, began laicizing the few priests who were abusers, and streamlined the reporting process). The rate of sexual abuse in other Christian and Jewish denominations, however, has continued to skyrocket way above the current or past Catholic allegations, which doesn’t bode well for those Protestant denominations which are now gleefully ordaining gay priests and bishops, or for the BSA, who is being pressured to adopt similar policies. Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat the mistakes of history. The historical lessons for this in any program with boys and adults in a mentoring relationship should be obvious.

          (Arguments that homosexuals are not “pedophiles” are semantically meaningless, as we are not really talking about pedophilia here (which involves younger children), we are talking about pederasty – the attraction of some (not all) homosexuals for teenage youths. Many homosexuals, and many heterosexuals, find teenagers attractive and seek to have sex with them without being considered “pedophiles.” They are just immoral ADULTS who would have sex with a teenager, in violation of moral, cultural, and legal standards. We seek to prevent this behavior by denying adults of any sexual orientation access to youths they would victimize, especially if the circumstances (such as isolation or mentorship) favor isolation. The particular outdoor nature of scouting represents a special danger of victimization due to isolation, so I understand why you would not want adult males camping with a group of teenage Girl Scouts camping overnight in the wilds. LGBT activists should extend the same courtesy to us and understand why it is not prudent to include those with an attraction to the male sex into a group of teenage Boy Scouts camping overnight in the wilds.)

          I don’t think the new proposal is the best solution, as it seems to be hypocritical – “we’ll accept you as a youth with a same-sex attraction, but not an adult.” I’m still on the fence on this, to be honest, but don’t think it is the best option for the following reasons:

          On one hand, it would seem that the new policy would be letting the camel get its nose under the tent – if you let that happen, the entire camel will be in your tent very quickly. The ability to defend a legal challenge to admit gay leaders would become very difficult if the policy is changed (which may be the goal of some activists, who initially opposed this idea but are now more supportive as they see it as a route to eventual normalization of homosexuality within the Boy Scouts.)

          More importantly, it still creates youth safety issues, and the issues of tenting, showers and other issues are legitimate concerns. Most child sexual abuse is at the hand of another minor. This is a legitimate concern for the parents who entrust their boys with the adult leaders. The LGBT activists who are pushing the troops to admit gay scouts and leaders will NOT be there to support you, legally or otherwise, when the first incident of abuse happens with a gay scout or scouter under your watch. It would also appear to remove a religious CO’s ability to make its own decisions about what kind of moral behavior is acceptable within a troop, in violation of their right to religious freedom – it is really, the Anti-Local Option. In practice, it will also lead to changes in our core policies of leadership. Decisions that are properly overseen by the SPL and PLs – such as who pairs up with whom in tents, on projects, in accompanying another scout to the latrine or showers – will now become Youth Safety Issues, and which should properly be made by an adult. This will cause a change in the boy-led, patrol-based method for the worse, and could have even more tragic consequence if an immature youth leader makes a mistake in judgment.

          The (quite extensive) research from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) shows that the rate of self-destructive and risk-seeking behavior is far, far higher among LGBT youths than among heterosexual youths in nearly every category. That’s a concern for those troops that would admit LGBT youths, who may represent a threat to the safety of heterosexual kids in ways other than sexual abuse. LGBT activists have argued that such risky behavior is only the result of societal disapproval and bullying, but many or most of the behaviors would not seem to result from such disapproval, and many of the behaviors would seem to derive from the nature of homosexual culture itself – the very high comparative rate of suicide and suicide attempts among LGBT individuals remain the same (or higher) in cultures that are now very gay-tolerant (such as the Netherlands), and the most common cited reason for LGBT suicide attempts in research studies was being dropped by a sexual partner. The latter can’t really be caused by societal disapproval as much as a highly promiscuous sexual culture.

          We can’t completely change society, but we can discourage (or at the very least, not encourage the acceptance) of a lifestyle that has a higher rate of depression, suicide, substance abuse, illness, etc., and should not encourage or condone a lifestyle identification that is physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually dangerous out of a misguided sense of “compassion.” One should feel compassion for someone struggling with a problem (such as alcoholism), but one should not encourage the behavior associated with the problem. One should also consider how such self-destructive behavior will inevitably impact on the safety and happiness of those around them.

          On the other hand…

          I’m still not certain if completely banning any boy who may be struggling with his sexual identification is what we want to do. Despite what LGBT activists tell you – that a boy’s early self-identification as “gay” (or “coming out”) is fixed, immutable, and no one should ever try to change it – the best research available (which had a huge survey population) actually shows that from age 16 to 17, and from age 17 to 25, youthful identification as “gay” or “bisexual” is discarded more often than not as part of the maturation process, while heterosexual identification tends to remain largely fixed. This is good news, I think. Boys do and say some stupid things, and adopt attitudes and beliefs that are (largely thankfully) later discarded. A process of adult mentorship and positive role-modelling helps kids to establish a healthy identity. How this particular research impacts on the issue is hard to say, but it may argue for allowing kids in to Scouting who may be unsure of their sexual orientation, while not acknowledging it as a fixed decision or encouraging them to do so. From this point of view, the current option (probably unfairly known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” with a healthy dose of Youth Safety Procedures) remains the best option.

        • I was just thanking you for the correction.

          Could you post a link to your claim that:
          “The rate of sexual abuse in other Christian and Jewish denominations, however, has continued to skyrocket way above the current or past Catholic allegations, which doesn’t bode well for those Protestant denominations which are now gleefully ordaining gay priests and bishops, or for the BSA, who is being pressured to adopt similar policies.”

          I can’t find anything on that topic but I did find this:

          Which said:
          “By way of contrast, let’s also consider that the liberal mainline Protestant denominations — the ones that respect the moral capacity of women to determine their reproductive life, and many of which not only welcome LGTB people, who are then treated with dignity and equality, but may serve in leadership roles — do not turn a blind eye to the problems, but also seek to prevent and address child sex abuse by clergy and others.

          These include, among others, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church, USA, United Church of Christ (PDF), The Episcopal Church, and the United Methodist Church as well as the Unitarian Universalist Association. What’s more, the progressive Religious Institute has resources for religious organizations considering developing policies and programs in this area, and consults with those who are looking to improve their policies and performance.”

          and said this:
          “Robert Parnham of the Baptist Center for Ethics sees the matter clearly

          Catholic and Baptist leaders have more similarities than differences on the child-abuse front. Both have harmed church members and the Christian witness by not swiftly addressing predatory clergy and designing reliable protective systems.”

          This is not an old story but an new one. Just look at the date 4/13/13. I like numbers so please post a link to your claim.

        • This article discusses how the rate of molestation is relatively equal among all denominations as reported by several insurance providers.

          ““It would be incorrect to call it a Catholic problem,” said Church Mutual’s risk control manager, Rick Schaber. “We do not see one denomination above another. It’s equal. It’s also equal among large metropolitan churches and small rural churches.”

          Iowa-based Guide One Center for Risk Management, which insures more than 40,000 congregations, also said Catholic churches are not considered a greater risk or charged higher premiums.

          “Our claims experience shows this happens evenly across denominations,” said spokeswoman Melanie Stonewall.”

        • Deanna,

          You are very welcome for the correction.

          The stats are based on the John Jay study on past allegations of abuse in the Catholic Church, This report was released in 2004, but provides an historical over view of the reports from 1950 – 2002.

          The current stats on allegations of abuse within the Church are from the annual audit, (2012 has not been published yet, I think). Even a single abuse allegation is unacceptable in any denomination, but the cases that we are continuing to see are almost entirely from decades before. Current allegations (not proven, but considered by law enforcement as worthy of investigation) for the entire year of 2010, was eight. For 2011, the number went down to seven. (If there are roughly 41,406 Catholic priests in the United States, seven credibly accused priests would represent .000169 (or 0.0169%) of all U.S. priests.) Considering that the Catholic Church remains the single largest Christian denomination in America, it’s not a good number (a good number would be 0), but it tracks better than most professions and many denominations, not because Catholic seminaries attract holier people than other seminaries, but because the restriction of those with a same-sex attraction, changes in how the cases are handled, and the laicization of offenders have mostly worked.

          Of the figures cited above, it is also important to notice that

          • 45% of all priests who were accused for 2011 were already deceased (this is a record high figure);
          • 75% of all priests who were accused for 2011 are either deceased, already removed from ministry, already laicized, or missing;
          • over 90% of all abuse accusations last year allege incidents from at least two decades ago (the most common time period was from almost 40 years ago: 1975-1979).

          That 1975-1979 period is crucial in terms of what was going on in American society, in American views of sexuality (including a much more liberal view of sexuality that was included in seminaries at the time), and other issues going on within the Catholic Church. The fact that this was at the tail end of the Vietnam military draft, and that many gay men understandably did not want to join the military when homosexuality was a crime under the UCMJ, may have also played a factor in the increased numbers of those with an SSA seeking a religious deferment.

          A persistent danger we have to face is that high minded ideals in any group, religious or secular, are no protection against the wolf in the fold. Those who desire to have sex with minors, will go where the minors are. That is true of all religious denominations, that is true of youth groups, and that is true of secular professions that involve children. That is why we have youth safety procedures, and why we restrict access to vulnerable populations. This is not the only reason for the current policy, but it is a reasonable one.

          The rate of sexual abuse of minors within the educational system remains high (apparently far higher than within churches), as the Department of Education has shown:
          And as some denominations have protected the abusers within their ranks, so have the teachers’ unions closed ranks to protect abusers within their numbers:

          The rate of sexual abuse of children within the foster care system, within the medical system, by correction system staff, within the entertainment industry, all would appear to be higher than within religious organizations. All these are secular organizations that (by and large) profess liberal values concerning LGBT goals, yet their rate of abuse remains high.

          You commented that “By way of contrast, let’s also consider that the liberal mainline Protestant denominations — the ones that respect the moral capacity of women to determine their reproductive life, and many of which not only welcome LGTB people, who are then treated with dignity and equality, but may serve in leadership roles — do not turn a blind eye to the problems, but also seek to prevent and address child sex abuse by clergy and others. These include, among others, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church, USA, United Church of Christ (PDF), The Episcopal Church, and the United Methodist Church as well as the Unitarian Universalist Association. What’s more, the progressive Religious Institute has resources for religious organizations considering developing policies and programs in this area, and consults with those who are looking to improve their policies and performance.”

          No one is claiming that people of good will within those denominations are not looking at ways to curb abuse. There are current case of abuse in all those denominations. The fact that they have to adopt such policies indicates that this is a problem for them.

          Protestant denominations have seen a spike in abuse cases, per insurance stats, and based on the reported number of cases that are in the media. A daily review of your paper for abuse arrests, if you live in a fairly large-sized town, will demonstrate that this continues to be a problem, even as the Catholic allegations have dwindled. These stats are not broken down by heterosexual or homosexual abuse (both are equally evil), but given the increased number of victims created by homosexual vs heterosexual abusers, we can certainly draw some conclusions:

          As the 2007 article notes, this could be the tip of the iceberg, as many smaller denominations and non-denominational Christian churches do not have the centralized record-keeping system of the Catholics. The rate of reported child sexual abuse just for those Protestant denominations that are insured by the big 3 insurance firms averages about 260 a year, as of 2007. YSP may have dropped that somewhat, but there is no indication that it has. All the denominations you name are dealing with abuse allegations against their clergy. Google the name of the denomination and “sexual abuse” and see what you find.

          This has nothing to do with whether one denomination is more “correct” or “holier” than the other – every denomination has sinners and saints within in, that’s why we need religion – but it has everything to do with how we screen those who have access to children, the level of access and isolation they have with those children, and the YP policies that are a part of that.

          If an increase in the number of those men with a same-sex attraction led to greater rates of abuse within one denomination, why do you think it will not lead to a greater rate of abuse in other denominations that adopt a similar policy, Deanna? Because the group you favor is more “saintly” or is okay with abortion or something?

          Whether you agree with the Catholics’ policies on “reproductive freedom” or anything else with which you are concerned, you should at least pay attention to the lessons to be learned from their experience. It’s better to learn from other’s mistakes than your own.

          An additional problem that churches which adopt a gay-inclusive policy will face is that many members will vote with their feet. Outside of extremely liberal communities (and even within them), many long-time church members do not agree with the new policy and will leave, as in this church: Adoption of new doctrines that no longer see homosexual acts as sinful have led to schisms within many mainline Protestant denominations. Some Episcopalian priests (81) and congregations (about 1500 people) have left their traditional denominations and converted to Catholicism (while retaining their traditional liturgical rights) under the Anglican Ordinariate of the Catholic Church, largely in protest over the ordination of gay priests and bishops. These are numbers that any denomination cannot afford to lose in these times of declining church attendance and ordination. The Evangelical Lutheran Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the United Church of Christ, have all fractured over the ordination of openly gay clergy.

          These schisms are doctrinal issues that are very important to the people involved but need not concern us here, except to note that all of these people presumably cared a great deal about their long-term religious faiths, yet were willing to leave it and go to another denomination, synod, or confession, largely because LGBT issues. In many cases, these splits caused hurt feelings, loss of long-term friendships, destruction of standing traditions, significant funding and contribution losses, and deep distress to all involved. _Do you think people with a traditional outlook on morality would be more likely to remain in the Boy Scouts, than they were for their actual RELIGION, if they disagree on such a fundamental issue, Deanna?_

          This does not bode well for the survival of the BSA. Based on the analogous experiences we see in American religious denominations in changes of doctrine to accommodate LGBT agendas. Many will leave, many will transfer to other youth safety programs if this issue is not handled well.

      • AZ It is fruitless to bring in what Jesus Christ did or did not do on
        homosexuality. Religion will always be a problem for them like any other sin it is either true or it is not true. The bible cannot be proven by man itself only through the holy spirit will God and his Prophets reveal it truths to man. So religion is not going to be the issue in the new proposal by the National Board as it shouldn’t be. It is time to move on and stop using religion as it will not stop and solve the issue. We have been all over the map with our comments and it is time to stay with the issue on what is best for the BSA and how to keep it intact for the future. There will be some who will drop out of Scouting and there will be some who will stop funding the BSA the whole thing is a result of trying to change a policy that is not necessary if we have to ignore homosexuality in private corners as we have done for many years so be it. I have not experianced homosexuality personally in Scouting because it was not allowed and the BSA have spent millions and millions defending in Courts the exclusion of homosexuals in Scouting. It looks like the BSA wants to come out of the closet and declare to the members of the BSA forget about what you have believed in all your years in Scouting those timeless values are no longer the future of the BSA . I appologize for trying to defend my religous beliefs over the issue of what the BSA National Board has to face in Scouting. Lets stay the course and not use religion for or against the vote in May. Sincerely,
        Trenton Spears

        • “I have not experianced homosexuality personally in Scouting because it was not allowed ”

          You have not experience homosexuality in Scouting because nobody, anywhere, even talked about homosexuality openly until about the late-1980s. And when people did start talking about it, BSA immediately went into reactionary mode and starting kicking out gays, where no such BSA-wide ban had ever existed before.

          Then, when BSA got taken to the court over this arbitrary ban, BSA invented a fiction that BSA teaches about homosexuality to scouts, in order to legally justify its ban to the court.

          Now, BSA must unravel this mess it has created for itself. And I agree that part of this unraveling involves leaving religion out of it.

          But I don’t agree with the fiction that BSA has never changed its views about homosexuality. The fact is, BSA, as a national organization, never had any view about homosexuality until the late 80’s. Sure, they never needed one until then, and they never had one.

          Then, sometime around 1991, BSA, for the first time, publicly stated a nation-wide ban on all gays.

          I agree that BSA must return to its timeless values, the values it has held since BSA’s founding. But those values say nothing about homosexuality. They didn’t in 1910, and they never did until 1991.

          BSA must return to its timeless values of holding no view about religious doctrine, and no view about sexuality. BSA can’t move forward until it returns to the timeless values on which it was founded.

        • cwgmpls. You are hard to figure out where you stand . You are all over the place and seem to have a variety of values of which are hard to understand. The law suits against the BSA that the BSA won in Court in the 1980’s gave them the right to set their own policy excluding Homosexuals therefore the BSA does have a policy and values against homosexuals and timeless values are proof of their set values there is know doubt about it there is no middle ground on values If after 103 years and your term as a Scout leader you do not know what the values mean time to be re-trained . The problem with homosexuals then is the same as today their sexual choices are not consistant with the values that have been the standard since 1903. If you read todays paper it has another story of a law suit against the BSA because of sexual abuse years ago. The BSA covered up the allegations and thus another Scout Leader got away from prosecution for molesting boy Scouts. Sorry your comments lean towards your approval of homosexuals in scouting and like I stated earlier all over the place. Sincerely, Trenton Spears

        • “The law suits against the BSA that the BSA won in Court in the 1980′s gave them the right to set their own policy excluding Homosexuals therefore the BSA does have a policy and values against homosexuals and timeless values are proof of their set values”

          The law suits against the BSA that the BSA won in Court in the 1980’s were appealed to the Supreme Court. The basis for the Supreme Court decision in favor of BSA were based on statements made by BSA between 1991 and 2000.

          The BSA stated policy and values against homosexuals originated around 1991, not 1903. Prior to about 1991, BSA had no written policy excluding homosexuals from membership, and had no written policy stating that homosexuality was contrary to BSA values.

        • Or perhaps you are referring to the Curran case, which originated in 1981. BSA eventually prevailed in that case, in California Supreme Court, because the Court determined that BSA did not match the definition of a “business establishment”, so California nondiscrimination laws did not apply to BSA in that case. The BSA victory in that case, which was finally resolved in 1998, was not based on BSA’s stated values, but on the fact that BSA was eventually ruled to be outside of that specific law.

    • Trenton,
      I respect your point of view. As Christ never really came out against pork, I’m even guessing you may share my view on the virtues of a good slab of bacon cooked in a cast iron skillet over the fire on s Sunday morning in the woods. I do have to disagree on the point that Christ, who never in the bible condemned homosexuality, would look at my ‘adopted’ daughter as a sinner. When our good friend Sue lost her 11 year fight with breast cancer, her 2 daughters joined our family. She told my wife when her youngest was 8 years old that she was pretty sure her youngest was gay. God made her that way, and God’s work is good. She has grown to be a lovely, principled, and moral young woman. I have several friends who are gay or lesbian. Several of our children’s friends are gay and have spent many hours in our home. To a one they are all fine people who follow all of Gods principles that you do to the best of their ability except the one in question here. Would I have any problem with any of them being my grandchild’s scout leader? No! I don’t know why so many people equate homosexuality with pedophilia. They are two entirely different things. How is this different than making the leap that since some heterosexual men rape women, heterosexuals are rapist and should be excluded from scouting. Neither of these extreme jumps is true. Forcing equality is the American way. We need only to look at the Supreme Court ruling in Brown vs the Board of Education that desegregated schools in Mississippi. I believe a key principle in this ruling was that separate will never be equal. I respect your right to interpret the bible’s view on homosexuality as a sin. All I ask is that you not sit in judgement of those who’s religious beliefs on this matter are different from your own. I agree that known pedophiles have no place in scouting. We have nothing to fear from homosexuals in scouting, just as letting blacks into previously segregated troops did not cause the end of scouting. Christ said judge not and love one another, not love just the folks who are like us. I certainly cannot argue with His word

      • Before AZMike can fact check me.. it was the Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. There were many states that were more forceful in the opposition to desegregation that Mississippi. My apologies for the inaccuracy, but the principle that separate educational facilities are inherently unequal, was the unanimous 9-0 opinion of the court

      • Brian,
        🙂 Your children are lucky to have such a great dad as you.

  16. When, during your troop’s activities, do you teach the Bible to your Scouts? I went through Scouts in the mid and late 70’s, with a troop chartered by a public school. About 10% of my troop was Jewish, about 20% Protestant that went to church regularly and studied the Bible a bit, and about 70% boys who, if you asked them, would tell you they were Christian but had never been to church other than for a wedding or funeral, and wouldn’t know 1 Kings from 1 Corinthians.

    I earned my Eagle rank with this troop, and we never talked about the Bible in Scouts. Ever.

    Is this uncommon? Hearing all the Bible debate going on hear, it seams like BSA is a Christian Theological Seminary or something. But that was not my experience of Scouting.

    Do you guys actually teach the Bible in your Scout Troop? If so, in what way, and using what activities?

    Based on my experience, it surprises me to see all of this Bible debate going on here. I never experienced this in any of the Scout activities I have been involved in, in the past.

    • Our Troop is sponsored by a Church and that is on our flag. In our City, all of the early troops except one were sponsored by a Church and the the Adult leaders of that Troop many years ago asked a Church to sponsor their Charter so every Troop in town is now sponsored by a Church. At all district and council events, the Bible is used unless it is the non-denominational service that BSA provides but the prayer is always in the name of Jesus Christ.

      Our Chaplain Aide has always used the Bible on Sunday morning for his worship service. If we are at the moment without a Chaplain Aide, I or another Asst. Scoutmaster will assist a Scout or he will prepare a service on his own from the Bible. We are all Christian or Mormon. There are many brochures from National BSA promoting how a Church can incorporate Scouting as a ministry. We don’t hide the fact that we are a Church and we pray at the end of every meeting. We had a boy with a Muslim father and Christian mother but neither were regular attenders or practitioners of their faith. The Scoutmaster at the time spoke with them when the Scout joined and they gave the option to their son as to whether he attended service for not and we did not make it mandatory for him. We would accommodate any child but would allow each religion to have a common service just as it is as Jamboree.

      • > We would accommodate any child but would allow each
        > religion to have a common service just as it is as Jamboree.

        At the Jamboree, each religion held a separate service on Sunday morning (perhaps there were some on Friday or Saturday, but I wasn’t aware of them).

        Do you mean a “common” service, like a Scout’s Own (non-denominational/non-sectarian), or that you would allow each youth to hold their own separate service?

        What I’m really asking is whether you deal with religious plurality by keeping the group together and holding a Scout’s Own, or send each religion on their way separately to hold a service tailored to their beliefs.

        • No, at Jamboree, different Scouts went to Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, Christian and Mormon services.

          We do not do Scouts own in our Troop as we are all Christian, so we do a Christian service.

    • Our unit does not have any bible instruction. Our religious activities are pretty much limited to having an active Chaplain’s Aide (usually a Scout who is quite religious) who says grace at meals, having a Scout’s Own service at Camporees (usually pretty lightly attended), and doing service projects for our Chartered Org (a Congregational Church). We have had some youth who are very devout, some who attend church occasionally, and some who are unchurched.

    • Neither the Troop that my boys are in or the Pack that they came from and where I am still a leader ever discuss the Bible. They do talk with the parents concerning the Religious Emblem and that if they are interested where they can purchase the books and find a counselor.

      Religious instruction is to be performed by the family not the Scout leaders.

      • To the List as large: Just to clarify so that my words are not distorted or misunderstood, in my Troop, adults leaders do not lead the religious service. A Chaplain Aide leads the religious service. If a Scout volunteers in the absence of a Chaplains Aide and asks for help, we will help him so he is prepared. The Chaplain’s Aide also leaders prayers at the end of the meeting and offers grace at meals. Adult leaders do not perform this religious function. As a Christian, I wouldf ail in my Duty to God to refuse help to a young Christian who has asked me to help him. If a Scoutmaster is doing his job and cares for his Troop and their families, he has already had discussions with them on religious matters so as not to prevent any Scout from freely expressing their religion as is guaranteed in the Constitution.of these United States.

    • Thank you for the various replies. Yes, BSA was designed, from its beginning, so that a Church can incorporate Scouting as a part of its ministry, if it wants to.

      That is the beauty of Scouting. And we can see how well it works by seeing the wide variety of ways that the Bible is used in Scouting, from never at all, to at every meeting, depending on the troop.

      I hope we all keep this wide variety of the ways that specific religious doctrine is integrated into Scouting in mind as we debate the issue of homosexuality.

      None of us want a specific religious doctrine forced onto our troop from BSA, that contradicts the religious teachings of our troop. I think we can all agree on that.

      • You are absolutely correct. I would only add one comment. I would hope that none of us would allow the absence of religion to be enforced on our Troop by BSA as is being done in many other areas of Society and culture.

        • Actually, BSA rarely uses the word “religion”. The phrase it uses is “duty to God”. While individual units are free to teach religion if they want to, BSA requires no specific religion instruction at the national level. BSA states that “the home and the organization with which the member is connected” shall define a Scout’s religious life.

          BSA allows the absence of religion in Scouting. It has from its founding. It does not allow the absence of “duty to God”, however.

        • See, now this is the kind of thing that turn threads negative. We had a very reasonable conversation about the Bible in Scouting which would by definition make i t about religion. You made a very good point and closed. I added one comment indicating that I hoped no one would be in favor of BSA ENFORCING (that’s what I wrote, look it up)

          Then cwgnpls said: “BSA allows the absence of religion in Scouting. It has from its founding. It does not allow the absence of “duty to God”, however.” Read enforce above. You just had to find some way to put it into a negative connotation. How can anyone have a conversation like that.

        • No ill will was intended. BSA has allowed the absence of religion in Scouting, from the beginning. Many troops make no reference to religion, other than to instruct a Scout to follow the religious teachings of his family, and respect the religious beliefs of others. That is it. That is the point I was trying to make.

          BSA does not force, or enforce, the absence of religion in Scouting. BSA allows for religion in Scouting, if a CO chooses to provide it. But BSA also allows for the absence of religion in Scouting, as long as “duty to God” is picked up at home.

          I don’t think we disagree. Sorry if I sounded like I was arguing.

  17. I’m a senior in high school. I am an Eagle with two Silver Palms, an Honor Medal, and a Hornaday Award. I’m an assistant Scoutmaster. And I’m gay. Does that last item make me any less of a person?

    • You will be in my prayers! As a matter of fact, you can join Venturing and be classified as a “Yoot” until you reach the age of 21. God help us all!

    • “I’m gay. Does that last item make me any less of a person?”

      According to current BSA policy, as well as the proposed revision, yes. It is BSA policy that anyone in a homosexual relationship is not capable of fulfilling the Scout Oath, and is not an appropriate role model for other Scouts.

      I’m still trying to figure out why BSA needs to have a nation-wide message about sexuality. I miss the good old days when sex was taught at home or in the church. I guess I’m old-fashioned.

    • You asked if your less of a person JRASM? Why? If during the time you were a scout you knew you were a homosexual and you knew being a homosexual while being a scout was wrongful and in violation of the BSA membership policy then what does that say for your character? If during the time you were a scout you weren’t sure that you were a homosexual and you had mixed feelings about the other boys in the troop and in your social network of friends but never acted on those feelings because you weren’t sure about how you felt about your sexual orientation then I’d say you weren’t wrongful and truly earned your Eagle Rank; fulfilled the memership requirements of the BSA. If you lied on your membership application every year just so you could earn your Eagle Rank then how would you gauge that character as an adult now? And now as an adult do you continue to lie on your BSA application every year when rechartering? You should choose to “respect” the membership policy of the BSA and resign as an adult leader if you are a homosexual; its the rightful thing to do. Are you a lesser person for resigning; I’d have respect for your decision to do the rightful thing and resign. If you continue to renew your membership each year knowing your violating the BSA membership policy then how does that reflect on your character as an adult? I’d think less of you for not respecting the BSA membership policy; you would be wrongful to violate it.

      Do you think people that lie are viewed as lesser people than people who strive to be honest? What would you think of someone who joined an organization or filled out a job application or resume and lied on the application or resume in order to gain membership or get a job? Knowing the BSA Oath’s statement of “morally straight” also means that you are not a homosexual, and you openly admit you are, then how would you view someone that stood up reciting an oath they knowingly openly violate with every act of homosexual behavior they engage in?

      If you are a homosexual then honestly tell me if you have ever been attracted to another scout or another scout leader? If the truth of your heart says yes then do you honestly think you belong in the BSA when you know that desire is wrongful to the scout or scout leader you felt that way abou; they trusted you were not homosexual because you took an oath saying you weren’t.

      If you are and have been a homosexual even in your days of scouting then I’d find it hard to believe that you’ve never been attracted to another scout or a scout leader. Do you think that sexual attraction belongs in scouting? Do you think that homosexual attraction should be associated with a scout with the Eagle Rank; a leader? Do you think that homosexual Eagle Rank scout should be in charge of other scouts? Do you think a parent should leave their child under your supervision without your having told them that you are a homosexual boy scout and that their 10 year old son will be under your direct supervision? Is that parent wrongful for saying no, you will not be my son’s direct supervisor. And would you blame them or think of them as lesser human beings, parents, for being concerned for their son’s welfare and safety; for being concientiious parents? What should we parents think of you for having lied on your scout application today and for all the years in the past? Are you a lesser person for having lied and deceived the BSA, all your leaders and all the parents whose children were left under your care without their knowledge of your homosexual desires; what do you think of yourself?

      • “you knew being a homosexual while being a scout was wrongful and in violation of the BSA membership policy”

        For two full years, from 2010 to 2012, BSA had no publicly accessible policy baring gays from membership. If a Scout was gay during that time, and tried to learn about BSA policy regarding gays, they would not find anything during that time that would disqualify them from membership.

        You can’t accuse someone of breaking the rules if BSA doesn’t tell anyone what the rules are.

        • cw, that is simply not true; a lie. We have always known homosexuals are not permited to join the BSA. I’ve been in the BSA since 1969 and I have always known homosexuals are not permited in the BSA. You’ve obviously been asking the wrong people what the rules are.

        • BSA has official websites that they use to publicize BSA policies. Most notably, and

          BSA’s policies toward gays has shifted through the years. One of the best-know BSA policy statements regarding gay membership was published in 2004. That statement quietly disappeared from view in February, 2010, as was not available anywhere after that date.

          You can look at this snapshot of from Feb 6, 2010, notice the “Policies” that disqualify gays from membership toward the top of the page, then click the blue right arrow and watch the policies disappear sometime before Feb 13, 2010.

          From Feb 13, 2010, those policies were not published anywhere, and were not publicly viewable by anyone, until re-written policies suddenly re-appeared on June 7, 2012 here

          If official BSA sources stop publishing a policy, who would you suggest that we ask what BSA’s rules are?

        • I’m simply not as stupid as you need me to be to believe your manipulation of the truths and deceitful twisting of words and their meanings. You are sincerely clueless about what the BSA is and what the BSA is all about. I don’t expect you to understand because you choose to not even try to understand. If you understood you wouldn’t even be on here trying to terrorize the majority of BSA members to be under your control as you continue to try to destroy the BSA to serve your own selfish desires for attempting to normalize what 99+ % of the people see as abnormal sexual attraction and abnormal sexual behavior; homosexual behavior isn’t normal. You should stop trying to hijack and steal an organization that doesn’t belong to you for their reasons they freely choose to have. Ultimately yours is a lost cause because you will never see a BSA as it is today blended with a membership policy you desire to fulfill your selfish desires. If the policy changes the BSA will never be the same all the way up until the day it crumbles into nothingness… You’ll never have it your way; do you really think you will?

        • Thank you Wallace. Keep up the faith. The battle we fight is as old as time itself.

    • Congratulations on your achievements and thank you for your leadership. Lets pray its not voted away.

    • JRASM. An Eagle scout is not just a rank, but it is part of who you are. The honorable thing to do would be to bow out. A scout is loyal.

    • No, JRASM, it does not make you less of a person. Congratulations on your Eagle and your other awards. And thank you for your service.

    • JRASM, Your sound like the kind of young man that we hope everyone that comes thru the program will become. Please ignore the few hateful messages of some on this blog. They use their Bible to justify putting you down out of ignorance that tells them other beliefs besides their own are not valid. You know better. Scouting asks us all to have a duty to God, the God that we know, understand and revere, as taught to us by our families. This is not always the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition, as taught by a specific church. Not all Catholics believe that use of contraceptives is a sin, despite the teachings of their church. If a young man, or a scouter’s faith tells him and he truly believes that his God does not consider homosexuality a sin, then he has not disobeyed his duty to God, and should not be excluded from this organization. It is not for those of other faith traditions to judge yours. I hope you continue in scouting to serve as a positive role model for the youth in your troop.

      • Brian, you have just demonstrated what is wrong in our culture. You believe that its OK to join a group based on certain beliefs even if you do not share those beliefs. That, by very definition, is not trustworthy. I suppose it is OK not to believe in honesty as well.

        You are an impostor my dear sir. A Christian that does not believe in the authority of the Church is a protestant. I have no problem with my protestant brothers and sisters in Christ. I understand their views which make them protestant; I hope some day will be together… maybe only when Jesus returns.

        HOWEVER, you claim to be Catholic or have knowledge of such things and try to use others unfaithful behavior to lead a young man away from God. May God have mercy on your soul.

        Matthew 18:6
        “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”

        • Mark, I wrote what I believe; how is that not honest?
          If one must believe in every teaching of policy of a church, you will find very few people who meet your definition of a Catholic. I did not say I was a Catholic, but I do consider myself Catholic, being a registered member, baptized and confirmed, and regularly attending both Mass and small group meetings where we explore our faith. You may be one of the rare Catholics who believes that the church is never wrong, and I can respect that belief. My friends at church often think I bring too much science and thinking into my religion, but as I tell them, that is how God made me. The science tells me that sexual preference is not a moral choice, but a fact of how we are made (yes not an incontrovertable fact, but the brain that God gave me allows me to look at the evidence and side with those who have the most evidence). My belief in God tells me that he made us. When I put 1+1 together, JRASM, a child of God, earned scoutings highest rank, and continues on after that to distinguish himself in this organization. He did that with his God given talents. I don’t want to lead him away from God, nor should we chase him away with our condemnation, even though it appears that you think he and I should be drowned in the depths of the sea. He is not dangerous because he is gay; I am not dangerous because I accept him as God made him. Scouting was not a homophobic organization until the 1990’s. With God’s grace, we may again learn not to use what you clearly see as a “sin” (seemingly the only sin that needs its own special exclusionary policy) to brand boys and men unworthy of this fine program. God bless you and God bless the BSA. He will get us through this.

        • Brian,
          As an engineer, I am intrigued by the question “how does the science work?” “Someone is born gay” implies that homosexuality is genetic.

          OK. Children are a mix of characteristics from their mother and father. Right? Since, homosexuals cannot proCreate, can you please tell me how a “gay” characteristic can be passed on such that a child is born “gay”?

          At very least we must assume that of the LGBT, that lesbians and gays which are exclusive cannot exist (naturally). Bisexuals may be able to pass on their genes and transgenders as well may be able to do so prior to their “change”, provided that they proCreate with a member of the opposite sex at some time.

          I think that (as most credible scientists agree) that behavior is an inextricable mix of experience and genetics. When families are broken and people are estranged from community, maybe they are not formed properly.

          In terms of faith formation, Brian I don’t believe you are properly formed in the Christian faith. I suggest you go through RCIA in your parish. I have gone through it twice already, and I learn something new every class….like the key to the spiritual life.

          In any case, Jesus is Lord. We orient ourselves according to Him alone. This is the call of the Gospel. Romans 1:22

  18. “… the BSA does not proactively inquire about sexual orientation of employees, volunteers, or members …”

    At no point during the application process or the Eagle Board of Review process is anyone asked if they are LGBT. There’s no need to lie, because the BSA does not ask and doesn’t want to know.

    Here’s an irony for you. If you or anyone else are asking youth or leaders if they are Gay, it is you – not them – that are violating the BSA’s rules.

  19. Since neither those who want to include gays in Scouting, nor those who want to keep gays out of Scouting, like the newest proposal, does anyone have any idea who wrote this preposterous “compromise”?

    One thing this new proposal does do, is to finally gets the pro-gay and anti-gay folks something we can agree on. We can all agree we don’t like the latest proposal!

    Strange as the new proposal reads, there is a certain logic behind it. We would know more about this logic if we knew who originally wrote the proposed policy. But I doubt we will ever know.

    • Todd, also, you must know that we discriminate between (not against) girls and atheists. We are an organization of principles. If you don’t believe in the Scout law and promise, it would understandable and honorable to leave and form a group based on your beliefs. However, to remain in a group that you do not believe in, is not trustworthy; And to work to undermine that groups principles, is a disloyal act.

      • Mark, I am working to get sexuality out of scouting like it used to be. See cwgmpls’ posts. Duty to God is still proclaimed in our
        Scout Oath. It does not say a fundamentalist Christian God though. It also says nothing about being gay nor straight, nor does the Scout Law.

        • Scouting is not compatible with all religions. Nobody should deny their beliefs in order to enter the forum. This is a grave sin to deny Christ. I do not expect a jew to forego the 10 commandments or a Hindu to forget his beliefs. The fact is that the vast majority a faiths which have found a home in scouting agree that homosexuality has NO part in scouting. If someone wants to start the Atheist Scouts of America, OR the Atheist/Gay Scouts of America, OR the transgender Scouts of America they can do so. We have a right to believe what we believe, we have a right to speak and say what we believe, and we have a right to assemble and organize based on those beliefs. We have these unalienable rights which have been endowed by our Creator! Stop corrupting the scout Oath and Law with homosexuality! Stop trying to redefine scouting! I would rather die than see our beloved scout Oath and Law corrupted!!!!

        • Todd, we live in a Judeo Christian society. The Aztec religion certainly didn’t believe in “helping other people at all times.” We have such a Western-European viewpoint that we see our principles as universal. History shows that we are an exception, and what a wonderful exception; Let’s preserve those principles we hold so dear.

        • The only religions that are incompatible with Scouting are those whose beliefs will not permit them to subscribe to BSA’s Declaration of Religious Principle, which every leader must explicitly sign and agree to every time we fill out an application. Here’s the part that appears on the application:

          “The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God and, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Its policy is that the home and organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life. Only persons willing to subscribe to these precepts from the Declaration of Religious Principle and to the Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America shall be entitled to certificates of leadership.”

          Some people’s faiths will not permit them to agree to that kind of absolutely nonsectarian Scouting. But those who can agree to honor each other’s right to worship God in different ways are welcome. This principle has been part of BSA’s explicit policy for almost 100 years.

        • Karen, every scout is required to follow the scout law and promise. These are beliefs which may not be compatible with all religious tenets…. and like I said the Aztec religion does not believe in kindness or courtesy.

          I was at a meeting a month ago in the San Francisco Bay Area Council, and I was surprised to see parents openly stating that they joined scouting even though they did not BELIEVE in scouting’s policies. They stated that they thought they could “change the organization from within”. THIS IS NOT TRUSTWORTHY. They come to tear down one tenet of our beloved Scout Promise, and in the fray they destroy the principle tenets. THESE INTERLOPERS ARE NOT LOYAL. My uncle fought in Vietnam, and they had a term for those who infiltrated the ranks. The enemy is in the wire. God save us.

        • For nearly a century, the only faiths incompatible with Scouting have been those whose doctrines do not allow them to sign the Declaration of Religious Principle.

        • Some Judeo Christian religions (mine included-Episcopal) teach inclusiveness. So it’s my Duty to God to stand up for that.

        • Do not deny Christ. A secular atheist world view is not the default position which we need to all aspire to. That view is just one world view among many. The scout promise states “On my honor I will do my best to be…. morally straight”.

          There is an EVIL movement in our society that aims to re-define marriage, re-define morality, and redefine scouting. We should be aware that this enemy will not stop until they have corrupted every promise and law in our land. Stand fast against this foe! A scout is brave.

        • My faith also teaches inclusiveness. I would encourage you to take your example from Matthew 5: 43-48 and Matthew 19:14.

          It is not reverent for one Scout to tell another what to believe.

        • Your selectively “Christian” Tina H; your “faith”. I wonder what other things the book of Tina H has to say about God and living a Christian Faith? When you pick a word here and a word there from the bible I guess you can freely choose to make it say just about anything you and your “Faith” want to say. The BSA is a Christian based youth organization. Mainly Christians have built the organization to be what the organization is today. Now people of different “faiths” feel some freedom to hijack and steal what others have spent lifetimes building just to serve their selfish desires. Aggressive Militant Homosexual Acitivists are waking up the silent majority and in time they will realize that their terroistic tactics are going to backfire resulting in their having gained nothing except a greater level of division between themselves and those they thought they could control with their hateful demonic tactics. Satan does live in the hearts of some and he seeks to deceive or use any tactic available to him to destroy what is Holy. The fun part is that God ALWAYS has His Victory, in His time, in His way… It’s eternal…

        • It is still not reverent for you to tell me what I may believe or what I may not believe, nor to tell me that my faith doesn’t meet your faith’s standards. I am not practicing your faith. My faith practices inclusion based on prayerful reflection. BSA must not chose your faith over mine, nor my faith over yours, for us both to be welcome in this organization about which we both care deeply.

        • You really are funny Tina H. You throw Biblical verses around like their of value to you and your faith and then you retreat behind hints of a mysterious faith that seems to steal from God’s Word passages that best serve you in following your mysterious non-Christian faith. I assume now that every word you share is deceptive and I hope you keep sharing your opinions on this blog. every word reveals a little more about the deceitful faith you practice. You shouldn’t choose to deceive JRASM to believe things that will lead him from living a Godly life. You also shouldn’t choose to speak for me; just keep speaking for yourself and your faith…

        • Tina, is inclusion the 11th commandment? And tolerance the 12th? We do not include girls nor atheists into scouts as well, and this is alright. Not all groups are for all people.

          Should we tolerate ignorance? Should we tolerate those who break our laws and policies, like the one anonymous “Eagle Scout” who says he is a gay leader? To me, these are intolerable acts.

        • Tina, I am reverent to God. A scout is NOT God.

          1) You do not love the sinner by encouraging the sinner. READ the ENTIRE sermon on the mount (especially Mathew 5:19) LOVE means telling the truth to the sinner and admonishing sins.

          5:19 “Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven.”

        • I expect the comment about reverence was based on the BSA’s handbook definition of “A Scout is Reverent,” which is “A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.” One is reverent toward the divine, but reverence also requires respect of others’ religious beliefs.

        • Are you saying that we should respect Islamic Jihad? Or ritual killing? Or the killing of children.

          Like I said earlier, not all religious beliefs are compatible with the scout promise and law. Reverence is “profound adoring awed respect” and this is reserved for God alone. I can respect that we all have a right to believe, but adoration of mortal men is against the first commandment. Understand? Do I need to include the first commandment in this transmission?

        • If you are teaching your boys the program, then you are teaching them that handbook definition of “Reverent,” straight from the Boy Scout Handbook. That’s where the words come from that say “He respects the belies of others.” And if you completed a leader application, you agreed to abide by the BSA’s Declaration of Religious Principle, which has been in place nearly a century, and which every leader must agree to in order to be eligible. Those are the BSA’s words, not mine.

        • Thank you Karen Zeller. You have just demonstrated what is wrong is our society. If you believe in a creator God, meaning is to be discovered. If you believe in self-creation you believe meaning is to be defined, like NIche.

          The statement you read is not a defining of ‘reverence’. This is an explanation. Everyone knows what reverence means and that it is not the same as respect.

          You talk like a lawyer (without a compass).
          Do you remember when Clinton said “I did not have sex with that woman”. Clinton lied because he spoke to mislead. However, the letter of the law would say what? Get to the spirit of it all! That is where human beings live, raise children, and bury their dead.

        • To be clear, are you saying that you do or do not teach this explanation of “A Scout is Reverent,” found in the Boy Scout handbook? “A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of others.”

          I’m not sure what lawyers and Bill Clinton are supposed to have to do with following the Boy Scout handbook, but I really don’t think teaching the content of the handbook is what’s wrong with our society. The Declaration of Religious Principle is fundamental to BSA and expresses the same idea in terms for leaders: “The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God and, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Its policy is that the home and organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life. Only persons willing to subscribe to these precepts from the Declaration of Religious Principle and to the Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America shall be entitled to certificates of leadership.”

        • Do you know what a straw man fallacy is? You just committed one.

          I am an Eagle Scout my dear lady. Please do not lecture me about the scout handbook.

          My problem is when people read handbooks as if they are law books, and believe that everything they read is a “definition”.

          THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG IN OUR SOCIETY. Redefining words to manipulate outcomes. Corrupting language for their own purposes. Reverent in the scout law is directed to God (by definition), we have a “duty to God”. The handbook reflects this.

          Respect is 2.: an act of giving particular attention : consideration.

          I believe I have given particular attention to the idea of changing our policy and have (after close consideration) found that the policy excluding homosexuality is based on sound scouting principles. The policy is analogous to our policy of excluding atheists.

          Scouting is an organization based on certain beliefs. Not all people NOR all religions share those beliefs. Nobody is required to join or share those beliefs. However, to join a group in which you disagree with those beliefs is NOT a trustworthy act. Wouldn’t you agree? Or do you have another definition for “trustworthy” that you wish to derive from the text of the handbook.

        • Since I did not make an argument, I do not see how I committed a fallacy. I did not argue one thing or another. I did ask a question; I asked whether you do or do not teach the explanation of “A Scout is Reverent” that is found in your handbook. Do you? That’s just a straightforward question.

          I see that you have respected the policy (given particular attention or consideration to it). Of course the handbook explanation says that we respect others’ beliefs. It does not just say “respects _________________,” leaving us to fill in the blank.

          Words mean things. To discuss what they mean — this is the way people reason together. It is not irrelevant.

        • Semantics Karen. Reverence is in regards to God. Respect for the beliefs of others does not mean that you agree with them; it simply means you are considerate that they have a right to believe. (one of those unalienable rights endowed by the creator).

          And isn’t that what this whole issue is about? We have a right to believe what we believe, we have a right to speak and say what we believe, we have a right to publish/promote what we believe, and we have a right to assemble and organize according to those beliefs.

          We are an organization based on principles. Let us defend our beloved scout promise and law against all corruption.

        • This pretty much proves my point that militant homosexual activists are seizing mainstream former Christian denominiations to serve as clubs to beat over Christian Churches and Christian based organizations to serve their purpose of trying to disclaim God’s Holy Word and gain moral acceptance through terroristic tactics, hijacking and stealing what belongs to God; His Church. But those former Christian denominations are dying and when they begin to perform pretend perverted marriages of homosexuals they will finally disappear as their membership will finally say enough is enough and walk away toward Christian Churches that embrace God’s Holy Word and write Church disciplines that reflect biblical principles rather than contradict biblical principles leading to a sinful church doctrine. The Episcopalean, Luthern, Presbyterian (USA) churches are dying. They pretend to reflect God’s will but the truth is being revealed and He has removed His blessing from their churches. You can’t defy God and expect to go un-noticed by Him; He isn’t stupid enough for that; never will be. The entire homosexual movement is becomming a bore to most people as they’ve simply pushed everyone too far and now all of it is going to backfire resulting in the other 99% of the population simply being fed up with all the wrongful attacks against them for following His Word which is written on ever persons heart already. Right will always be right in this modern day and in every modern day to come. It’s truely a timeless struggle between right and wrong; good and evil.

        • “The BSA is a Christian based youth organization.”- Wallace

          Please show me what BSA official document states this? I thought it was nondenominational in nature. Duty to God, but it does not say whose God.

      • Tina H, Exactly what book does your faith use as it’s guiding principle? I’m curious since you quote biblical principles so selectively?

  20. Homosexuality is not a choice. No acne-scarred 17-year old decides “I’m going to submit myself to more unrelenting harassment.” Also, do you have homosexual urges and choose to ignore them? Is your heterosexuality a choice? I try not to be belligerent, but I find it extremely disrespectful that you tell me that I would choose to be removed from such a wonderful organization.

    • Those of us that support the current policy only remind you of the rules. Ant belligerance would be a reflection on your acceptance fof the current policy.

    • In ways I can understand your conflicts JRASM and I’m sure in ways I can’t; I wonder if you can understand mine? The BSA is an organization with a set of standards and rules and one of those standards and rules is that if you think you are a homosexual and you choose to make that known to people in your social circles then you simply do not qualify to be in the BSA; their membership policy disallows you for their reasons. These reasons are their’s to have and they are free to set whatever standards and rules they freely choose to set; a constituional freedom the BSA exercises just like you have and just like I have. It’s part of what this nation is all about; Freedom. Remember what you learned in Citizenship in the Nation; a merit badge I earned as a boy and counseled boys in as an adult. And you should have and should now respect their freedom and respect their memberhip standards and walk away from the BSA; you shouldn’t have chosen to be a member from the time you decided you were a homosexual with homosexual desires; it’s that simple. It doesn’t make you less of a person because you don’t qualify for membership; find an organization where you do qualify for membership. It makes you a lesser character if you choose to violate the membership policy and not respect the BSA’s right to choose a membership policy they want to have regardless of their reasons; its an organization that belongs to millions of people and its not yours; it doesn’t belong to a tiny minority of people who choose to hijack & steal it from the majority of members who want the policy to remain the same for their reasons; their freedom. These members have chosen to join the BSA and comply with the rules and standards of the BSA and to mold their characters to these rules and standards from a desire to build characters the BSA represents; that’s what its all about. Choosing to change yourself to become what you want to be and hopefully that’s a man of good character representing all the good qualities the BSA holds up as a standard for boys to aspire to. Your free to choose to do the same thing too JRASM; your free to choose whatever life and whatever lifestyle you want to choose but your not free to attack other peoples freedoms. And people don’t have to aspire to your standards of behavior you choose for your life just because you think they should in the name of equality.

      Do you think because I’m a heterosexual man within the BSA as a leader that I don’t have standards I have to abide by to be the morally straight man that can be a mentor and a leader and a role model for youth to learn from and look up to. Do you think I’m free to loosely fulfill every desire and follow every temptation I might have and act on those desires and temptations just because I’m a heterosexual? Do you think there are boundaries and standards I freely choose to live by; principles I follow to live a Godly life? If I smoked, drank, lived an adulterous life, frequented the gambling casinos and strip clubs in the area, swore, spoke in disrespectful ways to others that I should demand acceptance and I should qualify for membership as a leader in the BSA? But if I choose freely not to act upon those desires and temptations and I choose to control my behavior and mold my character to all the standards of the BSA and more importantly God then do you think I should qualify for membership in the BSA and more importantly qualify to have an eternal life with God in Heaven through the acceptance of His Grace through the blood sacrifice of my saviour Jesus the Messiah? Yea.. I do… and your free to aspire to all the same character qualities, boundaries, and challenges of following BSA rules and more importantly Biblical Principles for your life; same as me. We all have crosses to carry in life, all of us. Part of yours is a desire for a homosexual lifestyle. But we can all aspire to a greater Love; far beyond fulfillment of earthly desires. And there is the only equality you’ll ever find in your life here on earth; His promise of a spiritual equality with Him in heaven. That’s the real treasure you need to spend your life seeking because in the end its the only one that’s really ever going to matter for any of us. People can choose to see you any way they want to choose to see you; their freedom. But God sees all of us in only one way; all equal in His eyes. I hope you choose to walk away from the BSA if you choose to continue fulfilling your desire for a homosexual lifestyle but more importantly I hope you never choose to walk away from God and that you always choose to seek and to have a close relationship with Him; that’s really the only thing that matters for any of us on this earth and He makes it all the more beautiful by giving us all the freedom to choose Him or not to choose Him. He gives all of us an equal opportunity to be with Him one day; our freedom to choose or not to choose to take advantage of that opportunity… There’s a membership policy that also has a price that needs to be paid; think you can demand He change His rules too; think He will?

    • Your a young man and probably ignorant of all the perspectives you need to try to understand before you try to destroy an organization you’ve described yourself as being wonderful. It is extremely disresptful of you that you would not choose to remove yourself from an organization that has made a membership policy that excludes open homosexuals from being members; a complete disrespctfulness on your part. But your a teenager and teenagers are typically more self centered and selfish; its just the nature of a teenager. I understand that to some degree having been a teenager once and also having two teenage children now. But being 30+ years removed from being a teenager and lived a life of 18 years as a parent I’ve learned to see things and feel differently about things than I might have when I was a 17 year old acne-scarred heterosexual boy with sexual desires and urges I freely chose to restrain in the name of moral straightness. My daughter is 15 years old. Do you think I would allow my daughter to join the BSA and sleep in a tent with male teenage boy of her choosing. Is that what your asking the BSA to permit you or any other homosexual teenage boy to do? Do you think a scoutmaster should be put in the position of deciding if two boys who are sexually attracted to eachother should be allowed to sleep together in the same tent? The energy of sexual attraction I’m assuming is no different between a homosexual boy toward a homosexual boy than it is between a heterosexual boy and a heterosexual girl. Why would a parent leave their teenage daughter in the midsts of a boy scout troop full of teenage boys? Could you imagine an organization like that; all the problems associated with that? Why do you think its ok for a parent to leave their teenage son in a boy scout troop with homosexual boys; boys who have made a point of making it known that they are homosexual and have sexual desires for boys of their son’s age? As a parent let me tell you that a good parent will not allow their son to be in a troop of this character. And this negative energy will be the energy that will eventually destroy and crumble the BSA. This is something you may not understand no since you’ve don’t understand what it means to be a parent and what the love a parent is for their child. You may never understand that type of love but believe me when I tell you that it is a strong love and a child being a member of the BSA to serve some activist or political agenda is meaningless compared to the love a parent has to protect their child and try to do the best for their child to grow to become good adults and quality citizens.

        • Good Point Tina H.. I’ll finish your biblical quote since you chose either deliberately or mistakenly to forget the entire message.

          “Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, they said unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned; but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest even unto the last, and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, no man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, neither do I condemn thee, go, and Sin No More.”

          Tina H makes a good point JRASM; homosexual behavior is sinful behavior but through Christ’s blood sacrifice you can freely choose to accept forgiveness for all sinful behavior and accept God’s Grace leading you back to a renewed relationship with Him. Good Lesson Tina H. And Jesus commanded the sinner to “Sin No More”. He didn’t say to just pretend your sinful behavior isn’t sinful because another human being told you what you wanted to hear; He said “Sin No More” meaning you can freely choose to not live a sinful life seperated from having a relationship with God. I wonder what the adulterous woman did after Jesus saved her life and forgave her for her sins? It doesn’t tell us… I guess she had to decide to live a disobedient sinful life from that moment forward violating what Jesus commanded her to do or to be obedient and live a life obedient to what Jesus taught her; His lessons about sinful behavior and the power of forgiveness. It’s a good story. I think it teaches us that you can’t ignore or rename sin for the convenience of not wanting to feel guilty of living a sinful life. Accept your sinful nature and accept His forgiveness and move toward a more Christ like lifestyle living a life without sin.

          And if I lied about my sexuality in order to gain membership into an organization that I knew did not accept homosexuals as members of their organization I’ve sinned again and I should resign or each day I’m continuing to live a sinful life for having lied to the organization (“go, and Sin No More”). And if I continue to attend the BSA meetings and functions and grow with a lust for their membership that I know is wrongful then I’ve sinned again.

          You made a good point Tina H. I agree. JRASM you should choose to walk away from scouting knowing that at this time in your life you’ve chosen to define yourself as a homosexual and that definition disqualifies you from membership in the BSA. If there’s a day when you choose to no longer define yourself as a homosexual and you know in your heart that you are no longer a homosexual then you might then qualify for membership in the BSA; your freedom to choose to prayerfully walk toward that day. But I agree with Tina H that through Christ’s blood sacrifice you will always find forgiveness for the sinfulness the Holy Spirit convicts you of in your heart. Your freedom to accept His forgiveness is what frees you to then surrender to His will for your life and live a rich life in a loving relationship with Him. It’s all there for you and for all of us.

          But the BSA doesn’t choose to accept homosexuals into its membership for the reasons they freely choose to have. Nobody should choose to lie to gain membership into an organization if they don’t qualify for membership in that organization. Deceitfulness is sinfulness too.

        • I missed the part in the story where Jesus invited others to sit in judgement on the woman forever going forward. Are you sitting in judgement? JRASM’s choices, his very reality, are between him and his God, not you and yours.

        • Tina, I am not sure you want to understand, but I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

          We love sinners. All sinners. Why? Because we are all sinners. Jesus came to save all sinners. Unfortunately some people are like the pharisees and scribes that were non repentant sinners.

          To understand our dilemma, think of some other behavior we may agree is not moral. For example, an adulterer (a philanderer of sorts) comes to be a leader at your troop. He is not repentant (he has no shame); He believes it is OK to “sleep around”. In fact, he professes his belief quite openly to the scouts. This is intolerable.

          Before you dismiss this story. I have a friend who grew up in San Francisco and had a gay leader for some time. The gay leader was open about his gayness to the scouts. He felt it was his religious duty to make scouts aware of gayness. Of course, they removed this leader… because there was a policy they could enforce. People with an agenda proselytize. Some things are intolerable.

        • There is only one God Tina H. He has only given us one Word; the Holy Bible. Since you chose to quote from His Word and selectively use a few of His Words I assumed you lived by His Word. If I misunderstood you then I’ll assume your not a Christian and therefore your not a Christian Sister to me; yoked by the same biblical principles to live a Godly life. But you’ll always be my neighbor. Your tactics are evil and foolish; don’t think your original. Your one of many who choose to try to manipulate and pervert His Word to serve your selfish desires. Keep talking; you only continue to reveal your true nature. I think your funny… you make me laugh…

        • Tina, you reference John 8:7. We don’t have any problem with the repentant sinner. The gay movement is about NON-repentant sinners. They are more akin to the scribes and pharisees who deny they are sinners. Try the letter (1 John 11:10) for size.

          And if you get really anxious read Romans 1:22-32. You are so far from the Truth!

      • We love our children! That is why we fight against corruption of our beloved scout oath and promise. Well said Wallace.

    • JRASM, I suggested you do the honorable thing and resign. If you love scouting and find that you can no longer live under the scout promise, then to leave would be honorable. I left the organization to join the army, and have just returned (maybe in God’s providence?). Leave and live according to your beliefs, but do not try to force your beliefs on others.

      We are all born with tendencies. I remember one new recruit who could not do anything but lie. His first inclination was to lie. However, we held him to the highest standard of scouting; a scout is trustworthy. We don’t change our principles based on political movements nor on personal preferences.

      Yes, We are all equally children of God: Created out of love and destined for eternal life. God is Love. Take away God and it all becomes mere shadows (e.g. love, family, marriage, justice, civil rights, etc.). Romans 1:25

      Good luck JRASM. Peace by with you. I mean that with all my heart.

      • Everyone isn’t destined for eternal life with God Mark. Everyone certainly has an equal opportunity to freely choose to follow His way to an eternal life with Him. It would be foolish to mislead people to believe that without His Grace you could ever be worthy to enter into His Kingdom. Without His Blood Sacrifice there wouldn’t be a way; darkness can never overtake light. I want JRASM to live an eternal life with God; I don’t want him to be mislead or to misunderstand the Way…. He said it would be difficult and that doesn’t mean easy…

        • Wallace, your words are much harsher, but you are right. If you are not heading toward the light, you are heading toward the darkness. I simply thought that to keep sin away from the scouts would be the honorable thing to do. The sin of pride tends to self implode if left to fester. I thought he would head toward that wall and find Christ waiting to help him home.

          Thank you.

      • JRASM, Your sound like the kind of young man that we hope everyone that comes thru the program will become. Please ignore the few hateful messages of some on this blog. They use their Bible to justify putting you down out of ignorance that tells them other beliefs besides their own are not valid. You know better. Scouting asks us all to have a duty to God, the God that we know, understand and revere, as taught to us by our families. This is not always the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition, as taught by a specific church. Not all Catholics believe that use of contraceptives is a sin, despite the teachings of their church. If a young man, or a scouter’s faith tells him and he truly believes that his God does not consider homosexuality a sin, then he has not disobeyed his duty to God, and should not be excluded from this organization. It is not for those of other faith traditions to judge yours. I hope you continue in scouting to serve as a positive role model for the youth in your troop.

  21. Ahoy Mark, At the Council “Listening Session”, two Black Scouters “brissled” at the mention that this problem equates to the “Civil Rights” struggle in the 60’s

    • Thanks for the update Bill. Those scouts should be upset that this gay agenda is compared to the civil rights movement in any way. It’s a lie that should be exposed more readily.

  22. Randomly replies sometime get posted as new posts on the very bottom instead of right after the intended post to be replied to. Sometimes they get stuck randomly in the middle. I wonder if this particular Bryan on Scouting topic has been the most ever posted to?

    • I was not watching this blog when BSA tried to sneak the first one past the membership but the second one did not carry on this long. Watershed decision about to be made by 1.400 people to be felt for years.

  23. This is what I know pragmatically, not religiously. 1. My straight neighbors hesitate to buy popcorn because they feel it supports a discriminating organization. 2. My straight friend is on the fence about her son joining for the same reason. 3. The BSA listening surveys this spring showed that those under age 50 support a less discriminatory policy. If BSA wants to grow in other than LDS or fundamentalist areas, it is going to have to respond to mainstream views. BSA supported racial integration when the Southern chartered orgs weren’t so keen on it.

    Religiously, how far do we condemn others for not following doctrine as a scout? Do we remove a scoutmaster when a few adults are aware that he quietly had heterosexual sex outside of marriage, or do we forgive and keep it out of the troop? Any leader who blatantly puts sexuality into scouting, whether by big passionate kisses with his wife at a troop meeting, or marching in a gay pride parade in a scouting uniform, is unacceptable. I think the defining issue is whether the scout is throwing sex as an issue into scouting, which is the wrong place.

    • I am responding to you as an Adult leader in Scouting and a parent of an Eagle Scout who sold popcorn, Spirit Cards, Boston butts, spaghetti dinners, pizza dough and whatever we could find to provide a proper Cub Scout and Boy Scout program.

      Pragmatically as you say, when I see a post like yours I recognize the colorful tapestry that America has become where people can be so different in different parts of the Country. Also, when I see a post like yours I respond with my experience to encourage those do not live in a less tolerant part of the United States.

      I have never experienced any person like you describe who hesitates to buy popcorn because we have a “discriminatory” policy toward homosexuals. Not once. Even those who do not buy popcorn say nothing about the BSA policy even if we are selling in front of Wal-mart. I believe you we just don’t get that in our Community. The good works of Cub and Boy Scouts are primarily the comments we get. I can see that your community must be a progressive community since anyone who believes in the current policy must be LDS or “fundamentalist.” Christian I am guessing not Muslim, Jewish or other religion. I reject acceptance of homosexuality as “mainstream” in America since only recently after years of positive reinforcement of homosexuality in popular culture and progressive community publik schools, it has tilted to over 50% and that is in opinion. At best 6 in 100 practice homosexuality so that is hardly mainstream. Strip Club patrons probably outnumber homosexuals by a wide margin but i would not call that behavior mainstream. Nice to bring Southern racism into it to and label a whole area of the country racist but we’re used to it. A lot of good people let segregation happen and it was evil. A lot of good people helped end it and many in the South. In any case, its ridiculous to compare segregation to exclusion of homosexuals on morality concerns.

      As I said in my very first post on this issue so long ago on this thread, i do not say that BSA is a Christian organization and I have dedicated 16 years to it because it is compatible with Christian morals and values. it is one program of many for Youth in our Church. When it becomes incompatible, I will leave it. All that to say, no one is condemning a Scout for not following doctrine that I have seen and I certainly I am not. My Christianity has very little doctrine and very much spiritual truth. The issue for me has always been that a Scout cannot be “morally straight”and “clean” and be an “open and avowed” homosexual. since being “out” means expressing your sexual preference, not tendencies as so many have said here to defend celibate homosexuals of which I have never seen or heard of one in over 50 years. I have seen that expressing homosexuality in your manner and habits to be the majority behavior.

      Nancy D. posted: “Do we remove a scoutmaster when a few adults are aware that he quietly had heterosexual sex outside of marriage, or do we forgive and keep it out of the troop?”

      In my Troop, absolutely. He or she is a terrible role model for young people. Are you actually saying the Scoutmaster should stay?

      Nancy D. posted: “Any leader who blatantly puts sexuality into scouting, whether by big passionate kisses with his wife at a troop meeting, or marching in a gay pride parade in a scouting uniform, is unacceptable. I think the defining issue is whether the scout is throwing sex as an issue into scouting, which is the wrong place.”

      I ask you, how can a Scout not throw sex as an issue into Scouting when he has said he likes sex with boys? Otherwise, how do you know he is a homosexual? I don’t think he or his parents will be able to help themselves except to bring it into Scouting. They want acceptance of their son and he wants acceptance from his peers on the parents and the Scouts terms. Any denial of acceptance will be dealt with by labeling the offending Scout a “homophobe” and throwing the offending Scout out. That should not happen.

      I have also said many times Scouting is not for everyone. Otherwise, it would be a Social program or Social club. BSA builds leaders of high moral character and values. Current policy says homosexuals are incompatible with that goal and I stand by the Policy. I’d pass that along to your “friend on the fence” and tell them take a stand for their son and join or not. Riding the fence only makes your butt sore.

      • Fred-We must live in the same region except when we sell popcorn at walmart they say no and go in and buy the same product for $5. Same product,same supplier. Had a cousin work in the office at the popcorn company. Heck some of it is grown in our county.

        We are about done with popcorn. We are adding wreaths this fall. When I was in cub scout and sold them we sold more volume and made more off the wreaths.

        No one ever mentioned discrimination to me before. Some one said Eagle was not worth putting on resume and colleges would trash the application. Yet national press supported the eagle who was expelled for taking a skeet gun to school by mistake and had his mom come to take it home.

    • And all the worst scenarios will certainly manifest themselves if the policy is passed and homos are permitted to be members of the BSA; It will all happen in time. And Homo pride day will come in Disney or other places in the country and the homos will don their BSA uniforms, band together and march in triumph down the streets of wherever it is that a homo pride parade will be taking place. Won’t that be a great day for scouting. Won’t that be attractive to all the prospective boys who hoped to one day be scouts and possibly earn the Eagle Rank but won’t because the membership policy changed and militant homos who choose to parade around in their uniforms triumphant for having conquered and destroyed the BSA will have stolen the BSA from boys who want no stigma or association with an organization that has now become the image of the homosexual community; another pretty feather in their pretty cap. Do you honestly think hetero teenage boys are going to become or continue being members of the BSA if the membership policy is changed. Do you honeslty think anyone in the BSA or outside the BSA is going to stop the homos from their triumphant parades, news talk show appearances etc. Nancy D.? Are you kidding me. And the BSA will be dependent on the < 1% of the population (i don't believe its a true number) who are homos to seel their popcorn, be members of the BSA, and participate in all the programs the BSA has and will have to offer including sensitivity training for hetero leaders and scouts in how to cater to the needs of the homo boy scout. You'd honestly have to be a fool to not believe all of these things will happen and come to pass. And that will be the end of the BSA. Without youth members theirs no sense in having a youth organization now is there. Why would anyone allow a tiny group of aggressive militant homosexual activists to control their organization and their organizations future? Since when did Americans start to allow terroristic tactics control their freedoms including their freedom to assemble with a membership consisting of whatever that free American Organization desired. If your friends don't buy popcorn then good for them for standing up for their right to choose who they want to support financially or who they don't want to support. I know many many more people that will be done buying popcorn and finished supporting an organization that's become perverted in their mission and permissive of homosexual behavior to exist in their ranks. And when the first 17 year old homo scout molests or rapes a 13 or 14 year homo or hetero scout what do you think that'll do for popcorn sales.. Who cares about popcorn sales at that point. The BSA will have changed a Youth Protection Membership Policy and opened the door for this tragic attack to happen, and yes, it will happen in time, you'd truly be a fool to not believe that. And then what will the BSA say? Will they blame it on the Council, the District, the Scoutmaster left having to admit homosexual boys into his troop. But what about the victim.. boils down to the victim doesn't it. The life of a boy ruined because you were worried about your neighbors not buying popcorn from the BSA. And I'll place the blame on you Nancy and everyone else that's supporting the policy to be changed to allow homosexual teenage boys the opportunity to join a youth organization and be allowed to be in intimate settings with younger scouts who inevitably at some point will develop a physical attraction for and a desire to have sex with.. It's only natural isn't it. Homo bloggers on here have said that they can't control being homos; the way they were born. And as a parent I'm supposed to trust a homo teenage boy to be with my hetero teenage son. About as much as I trust a hetero male 17 year old stranger to be with my 15 year old teenage daughter. My son won't be rechartered and since I pay the rechartering fee and I am the custodian of my son that's the way it will be. And the aggressive militant homos will have stolen the scouting experience away from my son but more important to me is that he will not be molested or raped in a tragic attack that will ruin him for the rest of his life. I love him that much that I'll protect him in spite of politcal correctness. Call me a racist, nazi, bigot, intolerant, rat, pig whatever you want; my son means more to me than any verbal attacks, I can take them all.

    • Nancy, I live at ground zero. They will not stop. The current suggested policy change is an attempt to establish a foothold in which a landslide of legal measures will be used to force us to accept gay leaders.

      AND BY NOT MISTAKEN: Gay activists will infiltrate the BSA simply to proselytize their beliefs to young boys.

      • Mark. I agree 100%. There are many homosexuals and homosexual parents who may not pursue enforcing their beliefs on others individually but with a high-profile target like BSA, you can rest assured that national Homosexual advocacy group lawyers including the ACLU will descend on BSA and make a point to not only allow homosexual leaders but implement a sensitivity training program so hetero boys would know how to act around homosexual boys..

    • We forgive repentant sinners, Nancy. The gay movement is not a repentant group filled with people who love Christianity or the Scouts. I have spoken to the hardliners. They are determined to destroy us.

      IF WE DON’T WAKE UP to the attack, we will be overrun!!!!!

      The response to the world is NO. And as far as the money goes, it doesn’t take much to camp…. a scout is thrifty. I do not consider 30 pieces of silver a substitute for my soul.

Comments are closed.