Skip to comments.AFTAH Appeals to Ernst & Young CEO to stop pushing Homosexuality on Boy Scouts
Posted on 06/28/2012 5:34:47 AM PDT by scottjewell
Either resign from the Scouts Executive Board or stop undermining the BSA with your pro-homosexual advocacy
Ernst & Young CEO Jim Turley is seeking to apply his corporations pro-homosexual ethos to the Boy Scouts. TAKE ACTION: 1) Contact the Boy Scouts of America [972-580-2000; 8:00 AM-4:30 PM Central Time] and commend them for not giving in to pro-homosexual activists by retaining their morally straight policy against open homosexuality in the Scouts; and 2) Contact Jim Turley through Ernst & Young [Contact Page HERE; or, through their global site HERE], and urge him to stop his campaign to turn the Boy Scouts into a pro-homosexual organization which would devastate the BSA (see AFTAH letter below).
I sent a version of this letter today to Jim Turley, CEO of Ernst & Young, who is reportedly lobbying the Boy Scouts from within to change their policy against homosexuality. Turley and Ernst & Youngs progressive, global, pro-gay values conflict with the Boy Scouts wholesome moral values so naturally he is working to overturn the Scouts values! Please read this Townhall column by Chuck Norris taking Turley and his close ally, President Barack Obama, to task for their gay advocacy, which now again makes the beleaguered Boy Scouts a major target of aggressive LGBT activists. For their part, the Boy Scouts issued a press release stating, Contrary to media reports, the Boy Scouts of America has no plans to change its membership policy. The introduction of a resolution does not indicate the organization is reviewing a policy or signal a change in direction. [See full BSA release HERE.]
My letter follows:
Dear James Turley, CEO of Ernst & Young,
I respectfully ask you to pull back from your pro-gay lobbying directed at the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) and leave this fine organization alone with regard to its longstanding morally straight policy against openly homosexual and atheist members and Scoutmasters. You are abusing your role on the Scouts Executive Board by publicly advocating that the Scouts change their homosexuality policy. At the very least, your actions are helping to energize other, more militant, activists in their ongoing (and often hateful) campaign against the Scouts. For the sake of the Scouts, it is incumbent upon you to either resign from the Scouts Executive Board or stop undermining the BSA with your pro-homosexual advocacy.
For many years now, the Boy Scouts have endured tremendous persecution and harassment at the hands of homosexual activists, including being dragged into a protracted legal battle that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court (which in 2000 upheld the BSAs freedom to adhere to its own moral code). We ask you to refrain from opening up that wound again in the name of a modern tolerance that is shockingly intolerant of Judeo-Christian moral and religious teachings.
You err in assuming that homosexuality is mainly a civil rights issue; it is actually a matter of changeable, unhealthy, volitional behavior and a contentious moral issue. Most parents simply would not be comfortable with the idea of modeling that unnatural behavior to their sons through Scouting activities. (It should go without saying that it is not bigotry but rather common sense for parents to be wary of sending their sons on camping trips with adult homosexual men.) A pro-homosexual posture by the Scouts (in the name of non-discrimination) would drive away many parents and prospective Scouts.
The BSA does not need this distraction: open homosexuality is hardly consistent with the wholesome values that most parents associate with the Boy Scouts. It is unfortunate that your company, Ernst & Young, like so many major corporations, has effectively chosen to promote immoral homosexual conduct and ideology in the name of diversity. (And I am curious as to whether Ernst & Youngs brand of diversity welcomes and respects its employees of faith who oppose homosexuality.) Please do not foist a similar ethos on innocent boys, whose parents enroll them in the Scouts not to subject them to politically correct social engineering but to build up their character.
Thank you for considering the views of the silent majority of parents who, although not nearly as vocal as gay militants, nevertheless will make their voices heard by abandoning the Boy Scouts if this noble organization is radicalized to accommodate open homosexuality and gender confusion.
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality
And from the LA Times, Chuck Norris takes President Obama to task for his pro-gay Boy Scouts stance:
I really feel like I am living in the end times. Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Yes, that passage of Isaiah sums up our times well.
Though LeBarbara speaks eloquently and forcefully, I still get the feeling this CEO will bow to the diversity and rights agenda.
If one does not have the guts to defend the BOYS SCOUTS of America... What kind of shitty people have we become??????... if we don't defend CHILDREN! from perversion... What kind of people are we?...
Never mind the ARM FORCES whom so many here profess to love and respect as the only thing we are proud of from government. Our soldiers and heroes who are being battered mercilessly with "homosexualization" indoctrination, and what choice do they have, but to obey orders from their superiors, including the QUEER IN CHIEF himself? And what do we do to defend them?.... except for a group of social conservatives in this forum, NOTHING!
Have we become such cowards, that we feel impotent to voice our opposition to these practices?
ARM FORCES = ARMED FORCES
probably a closet-degenerate!... would not want any kids near this weasel....
Maybe someone who is a lot smarter than this dumb pig farmer from the back wash of PA can explain to me how this is NOT a first amendment issue.
The first amendment guarantees the right of association. Inherent in that right, in my uneducated opinion, is conversely the right to DISASSOCIATE.
In other words, my right is to associate with like minded people or those I CHOOSE to associate with.
FORCING me to associate with people that I would not willingly want to associate with, is a violation of that right.
Where is the flaw in my thinking?
I do not think it’s so much a case of people being cowards as the fact that many vastly UNDERestimated how stealthy and crafty this linking of gay rights with civil rights truly was. If it were not for this “civil rights” connection, none of what is occurring now would have come into being. The second you argue with it, you are branded a “bigot” or a “hate group”. And I do not think anyone saw this coming. Or at least I hope not: If they did, they were remiss in not addressing it at its inception and nipping it in the bud.
It would be the end of the Boy Scouts.
The flaw in your thinking is that you assumed you were living in a constitutional democracy. You aren’t. You are living in a sort of Europeanized Nanny State.
I believe the courts have upheld the Scouts right to choose their leaders and their members, but jerks such as this Ernst & Young CEO are still free to use other types of pressure to try to change Scout policy.
(Pardon the caps, this is important)
GO TO AMMOLAND.COM & READ CHUCK NORRIS’ ARTICLE.
THEN READ THE COMMENTS, MORE THAN 200 OF THEM.
Ammoland.com is a site where they sell ammo & other gun stuff on line. Sounds perfectly conservative, huh?
Most of the comments are pro-gay. Militant, angry, anti-Boy Scouts, I’m gay and/or my friends/sons are gay kind of pro-gay. It’s like Sodom & Gomorrah have their own webpage. Not at all what you expect on a guns & ammo type of website. Don’t know how the connection was made. The few pro-Chuck Norris or pro-Bible commenters get angrily shouted down.
This is the face of the enemy, folks. They state up front that in-your-face homosexual militancy being shoved down the throats of the unwilling majority is the wave of the future & we “breeders” had d@mn well better get used to it. Very scary stuff.
Yes, it is important. But I think this Ammoland.com thing was a very strategic, activist - and not natural - move on their parts. I have often noticed the same thing when reading some news article about a gay issue and some Christian or Catholic crisis : 90% of the comments are progay, and the other 10% just give up. This was the whole idea: Infiltration. Same with Ammoland- makes you look stupid for thinking you were in a nongay agenda place. ;)
I meant it was a strategic action on the part of gay propagandists to infliltrate the ammoland site. They win conflict after conflict by the sheer force of their activist numbers - this, when being only 1-2% of the population.
You should actually post that Chuck Norris piece at ammo as an article for FR, and the comments below will also be seen. Thanks for pointing it out.
I still don’t understand. Chuck Norris publishes his articles on townhall.com so why doesn’t the gaystapo attack that conservative website? FWIW, many gay posters on ammoland tout their personal success, income levels, Eagle Scout status, offspring, we-are-everywhere.
If one rogue blogger can trigger false flag SWAT attacks on the homes of outspoked conservatives, what can this bunch do? Hope it’s a regional thing; gays do tend to concentrate their numbers in large urban areas.
Yes, it is likely regional. Good point about Townhall, and I do not know how to answer that. I only know that I have seen droves of pro-gay posters on many sites where I would not have expected to see them in such numbers, so to my view was clearly strategic.
Well Scott, I agree with you on the euro nanny state.
But as a poli sci major, I must correct one thing.
We are NOT a democracy of any sort. We are a Constitutional Republic. There is a major difference, but when the progressives succeeded in pushing through the 17th amendment, the lines got really fuzzy.
So I don’t fault you for thinking we are some kind of democracy, the propaganda machine is on full press mode to make the whole of the US think we are. I even hear pundits who should know better making that error so you are in good company!
Ha, right you are! I guess I should brush up on my own political science and US History!
I guess we are supposed to be a Constitutional Republic who adhere to the principles of democracy, at least in theory if not always in practice; However, the European model is being aped by the left, and the Republic is being left behind.
Good for you for knowing your facts so well. ;)
Forgot to add : we are a representative democracy within the framework of a Constitutional Republic. But you are right— we ain’t a direct democracy and are nothing without the Republic.