[TLBSHOW]

Philadelphia Scouts Decide Not to Ban Gays

May 29 — PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - The third-largest Boy Scout council in the United States has decided to defy a national scouts policy of refusing membership to homosexuals, members said on Thursday.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/919959/posts

[mickie]

Four young boys in this family that will not be joining the Scouts.

No more cash donations either!

[goldstategop]

Yup... in liberal cities the easiest reaction to intense pressure is to get the liberals to like you.

[Sam Cree]

I had always supposed that gay scoutmasters was the main issue, though as a parent, I certainly would not have wanted my son sharing a tent with a homosexual kid either.

But how many parents will think it is a good idea for their sons to go through puberty closely associating with a gay role model, and even camping out in the woods with such a person?

My feeling is that many will keep away from scouting if this becomes the norm.

[KC Burke]

...has decided to defy a national scouts policy of refusing membership to homosexuals, members said on Thursday.

As usual, the leftists twist the issue to claim, "its all about the children." An artful way to get rid of virtue by substituting a nebulous plurality, "children" for the true virtues to be held high.

This issue was, of course, never about young scouts, but about scout leaders.

Scouts are youth and the yongsters should never be classified in a sexual manner to begin with.

Scouting has always had youngsters that have gone on in later life to take that sad path. It has actually been a tolerant organization that has accepted boys on the merit of their conduct and not the height of their dunk shot or adolescent sexual exploits in puberty.

This actually works out well for Predators and poorly for youngsters that may, later in life, be in that sad category. Caring parents of any young boy will now be more hesitant of their childs involvment. Probably a growing percentage will send that child to Journalism Camp.

[IronJack]

I believe Scout locals are charted by the National organization. That group must revoke the local's charter, thereby severing any connection with the Boy Scouts of America. Then, they can form another local Boy Scout chapter that actually embraces the precepts of the group. They can also sue the former local if they refer to themselves as a "Boy Scout" troop.

[Lancey Howard]

This trend will likely continue until most of those Boy Scout organizations which are located in Democrat parasite nests (cities) are dead and gone. Look at it as a cleansing process. Boy Scout organizations which are based in civilized areas outside of the parasite nests should continue to thrive.

It is now more important than ever that charitable people shun scumbag outfits like United Way and be careful to direct charitable giving to deserving organizations which reflect traditional American values. The Salvation Army is a good one.

[LuisBasco]

... intolerant, homophobic, racist, anti-Semitic...

Let's see. What word doesn't belong?

[Mister Baredog]

Last year, San Francisco and Boston became the first branches to reject the concept of “moral straightness.”

The real point of all this is GAYS MUST RECRUIT. They do not reproduce other than by this means. The Catholic Church has been severly damage by the Gay Priesthood,gay Scoutmasters will bring the same tragic results to the Scouts.

The Gaystappo strikes again, ugh.

[elephantlips]

This is the letter that I just sent to the Cradle of Liberty Council in Philadelphia.

It is with great sorrow that I contact your office concerning the recent decision of the Cradle of Liberty Council to choose to ignore the BSA position on known homosexual participants in the scouting program.

1. The majority of Americans, as polled in any number of newspapers and media, do not want their children exposed to homosexual leaders anywhere but especially NOT in the BSA.

2. America's outcry concerning the Catholic Church and the homosexual priests and the damage they inflicted on their youth becomes a perfect parallel to the idea of homosexual leaders in the Scouts. Why is it so difficult for you to see that tolerance does not supercede safety? These children are in your care in a trust relationship. When a leader, known to be homosexual and approved by your council, violates that trust how do you justify the resultant damage which has been proven to be life long? It would seem that all legal precedent would put the councils who knowingly allow this, in a direct path of resposibility for the damage.

3. Only the exceptionally ignorant cannot see the moral decline in America. It takes great energy to turn from what one knows as right and to embrace that which is wrong and highly detrimental. Your council has just taken the steps to qualify for this ignominious distinction. Congratulations. What goes around, comes around.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

I do not think history records such a moral collapse as being experienced in America. Defeated by mere words i.e. equality, tolerance, love, pity. Amazing!

[JOE6PAK]

Come on boys..lets all Pitch a tent with Mr.pole smoker!

[SandRat]

I've been in contact with my local area Scout Council multiple times urging them to get hold of National Scout Headqarters and their representatives at the Convention in Phillie.

The message I'm asking is that they take the ofending PA Council paid Scouters and Volunteers at the Executive Governing Board Level to the wood-shed for some old-fashioned one-on-one counseling like our daddies used to give us.

Join me, get hold of you local Scout Council and tell them to pass on your disgust about the Liberty Bell Council to National and demand that National take that council to the wood-shed per-se.

[Lady Eileen]

bump

[lowbridge]

bump

[gcruse]

Here's a thought. Let's put on a musical! No, no. I mean how about having a weather type program with a big US map showing, say, a line of immorality moving down from Pennsylvania because of a low decency system in Virgina and a high dudgeon parked over New Jersey. The forecast is for scattered applause tonight giving way to intermittent grumbling as tolerance lifts in the early morning. No? Oh, well, back to your regularly scheduled indignation.

[RonF]

I'm a long-time Scout (= youth member) and Scouter (= adult member). A few comments:

Local BSA Councils are not-for-profit corporations consisting of local business and community leaders, as well as a few Scouters. They receive, and must renew annually, a charter from National Council to establish, oversee and support the BSA program in a geographic area. They in turn charter local organizations such as churches, veterans' organizations, fraternal organizations, schools, etc., to sponsor Packs, Troops, Ships, and Crews. These are also renewable annually.

If the sponsoring organization does not follow National and local Council guidelines and policies in running their units, the local Council can refuse to renew their charter. If the local Council does not follow National guidelines, National Council can refuse to renew their charter. In the former case, the unit folds and the Scouts would have to join another unit to continue in Scouting. In the latter case, either a new not-for-profit corporation would have to be started up to take over the charter, or the region the old Council covered could be taken over by one or more Councils contiguous to it. What's going to happen here is that first a delegation from National will meet with the Council's Executive Board (tha above noted local community and business leaders) to see just what their intent is, as opposed to what's in the press. If they persist that they are going to register "avowed homosexuals" as leaders, then I expect that they'll end up taking one of the steps I've outlined.

Note that it is the responsibility of the local units to select leaders. While the BSA is often brought into lawsuits on these matters, it's the sponsoring organization that has failed to do it's homework in registering an unqualified leader, and in failing to make sure that he or she is conducting the program properly.

National's basis for excluding homosexual leaders is because they provide what the majority of the BSA's sponsoring organizations believe are improper moral role models for youth. According to the BSA's own web site, any risk of paedophilia has nothing to do with it. And practically, if you search on Google for cases of molestation of Scouts by Scouters, you'll find that the Scouter involved either has no known sexual relations with adults at all, or is married and has kids.

What the BSA depends on to prevent child molestation is the proper selection of leaders by sponsoring organizations, and the strict application of the Youth Protection guidelines by the sponsors and the leaders. These steps will prevent child molestation of any kind.

The other way for parents to make sure that things of this sort don't happen in their unit is to show up. The BSA is not a program designed so that you can drop off your kid and a check once a week. "BSA" does not stand for "BabySitters of America". It's a family program, not a youth program, and you need to put some time in. Even if you can't be a leader, you can go on the occasional campout, hang around for a Troop meeting, run the Popcorn sale, help with the Pancake Breakfast, get your hands dirty helping with a service project, and in general observe what's going on.

I question the original author's characterization of the Minuteman Council's (Boston) announced policy re: sexual orientation of leaders. National doesn't seem to have a problem with it. Minuteman Council's policy seems to be "Don't ask, don't tell", which is National policy. They just stated it in a fashion that makes it a little more palatable for the locals. But I am unaware of any "avowed homosexual" who has taken a leadership position, "told", and stayed registered at Minuteman Council.

It's also worth noting that Cradle of Liberty Council isn't telling units that they have to accept homosexual members; they're saying that they can if they want to. Note as an analogy that BSA units can accept women as leaders if they wish, but many don't and are supported by both their local and National Councils (Troops sponsored by Mormon stakes do this) in their decision. The choice of leaders is up to sponsoring organizations and they are free to accept or reject leaders on whatever reason they choose (gender, profession, health, etc.).

Finally, cutting off support to your local BSA Council because there is an unresolved situation in Philadelphia is a sure way to hurt a bunch of youth and to make sure that they don't get the program from someone who wants to do so properly.

[vikingcelt]

This is so outrageous and depressing. When I was a little girl I was sort of an honorary member of the Cub Scouts and then the Boy Scouts because my parents were so involved because of my brother. Then, of course, I was a Brownie and a Girl Scout too. That these great organizations should be held hostage to perversion makes me sick.