The problem of openly gay scouts is one thing, but I presume there are gay boys in scout troops, because there are gay people everywhere, and even if they are only 1% of the population, you’d expect 1 out of 100 boys would be gay.
I think the straight boys know this, and the bigger problem would be that if you were gay and let it be known, your life in scouts wouldn’t be a pleasant one. Nobody would want to tent with you, or shower with you (any more than a 14-year-old girl scout would want to tent or shower with a boy, and for the same reasons, so it isn’t “bigotry”).
The problem with allowing openly gay boys to be in scouts is that, if that was the official position, you’d then have to enforce code of conduct to prevent the other boys from acting in a normal, prudent fashion, so that the gay scout felt accepted.
Having said that, I am sure there are gay scouts, and they behave appropriately, and their friends know, and so they are accepted, and it doesn’t cause problems. Exceptions maybe, but I think the current policy, which is really more of a “don’t ask, don’t tell, and don’t make a deal” seems to work fine.
I am more concerned with adult leaders who are gay. Not parents who help out, but the actual leadership. On the other hand, I would also object to female scout masters, and yet I understand we have those already.
It’s harder to argue once you allow a female scout master, that you are rejecting gay scout masters because of the sexual attraction issue.
For me, especially an attractive woman as scoutmaster would distract the boys from learning how to be boys. It’s bad enough that most of the public school teachers are female, and society is driving fathers out of the home. It’s hard for boys to have time with good male role models for good male bonding.
The gay scoutmaster would simply make that much more difficult. Also, I think it is easy to defend a policy not allowing gay leaders, since the scouts are for the boys, not the adult leaders.