I’ve tried a logical argument when people complain about the BSA policy, but I find they don’t do well with logic.
If someone says they want to allow a homosexual to lead the scouts, I ask them if they would send their 12-year-old daughters on an overnight camping trip with a 24-year-old single male. If they don’t immediately blanche, I remind them to think about what kind of single 22-year-old guy wants to go camping with young girls.
But that’s exactly the same situation if you send a homosexual leader with young boys.
The argument about homosexual boys is colored by the annoying fact that labelling younger boys as homosexual is actually a trick of the homosexual community. Most boys will have questions about sexuality, and they will naturally be curious, and will grow out of it as they become mature. So if we argue that 12-year-old homosexual boys can’t be in the scouts, we are unfortunately giving in to the homosexual agenda.
Still, it’s easy enough to argue — would you send your 14-year-old daughter on a campout where they slept unsupervised in a tent with a 16-year-old boy? That is exactly what you are doing if you put a 14-year-old boy in a tent with a 16-year-old homosexual boy.
I also like to make this logical argument. Let’s assume your goal is to prevent any opportunity or appearance for sexual attraction. We’ll use the shower as an example.
If you have all heterosexual boys, it’s easy. You can put as many heterosexual boys together in a shower, and they won’t be attracted to each other.
If you introduce a single heterosexual girl, you need a 2nd shower — that’s obvious. But, you could introduce as many heterosexual girls as you want, and you still only need two showers.
Now, what if you put a homosexual boy in the mix? Well, if you only have one, you just need a second shower. But what if you have a second homosexual boy? Well, they can’t go in the 1st shower, but they can’t go in the 2nd shower. Now you need a separate shower for every single homosexual boy. In other words, you can’t create a “gay-only” troop and solve the problem,. because then all your boys are sexually attracted to each other.
Theoretically, you could put one homosexual girl in with one homosexual boy — neither would be attracted to each other. But you can’t get another homosexual girl in the mix either.
That’s because there is a fundamental difference between opposite-sex attraction and same-sex attraction. Most people completely ignore this “pairing” problem But it is really a major issue with cultural socialization.
Because we know that when you add a sexual component to a social setting, it distracts. Put several girls in a room together, they will socialize. Throw an attractive male in the room, the girls will stop socializing, and start competing.
Well, in a homosexual community, everybody is competing. You can’t put more than two homosexuals together before you have the potential for sexual competition. Thus, homosexual communities are fundamentally sexual in nature, while the heterosexual communities can be organized easily into large asexual components.
Bookmarked, outstanding post.