Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

THE END OF THE BOY SCOUTS IN PHILADELPHIA
NewsWithViews ^ | June 2, 2003 | Hans Zeiger

Posted on 06/02/2003 6:39:40 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-112 next last
To: Imagine
Hardly a rant. Come Monday morning, the suit and tie go on and her they are -- looking just like everyday people...

Perhaps. But it's the sponsor's role to know more about the people they sign up as leaders than how they look when they go to work. If a sponsor doesn't know a candidate for leader personally -- what they do when they're not at work, where they go to church, what their hobbies and recreational choices are, who their spouse is and what they're like, etc. -- then they shouldn't sign them up. So I don't see much danger that people as described will end up as Scouters.

51 posted on 06/02/2003 12:07:58 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Thanks for the info. I'll look into it.

52 posted on 06/02/2003 12:35:52 PM PDT by RRWCC (Even under a good king, a subject is still a subject.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Yep, I would hate to be like that.
53 posted on 06/02/2003 12:44:25 PM PDT by RRWCC (Even under a good king, a subject is still a subject.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: tdadams
Wow, that's mind boggling. You'd think the Catholic Church problem would have tempered this idea.

Another drive-by slander. You go girl.

54 posted on 06/02/2003 2:03:30 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RonF
"Don't ask, don't tell", which is National policy.

Then they have a don't ask don't tell policy for incestuals, bestials and ax murderers too. That's rediculous and NOT ture.

55 posted on 06/02/2003 2:06:29 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lurky
Actually these are the guys that couldn't couldn't give a rat's ass about donating time to mentor young boys lest it get in the way of their busy social life. But don't let that get in the way of a good rant.

Not totally true because homosexuals have a much higher rate than heterosuals to offend children, but don't let get in the way of good sophistry.

56 posted on 06/02/2003 2:10:36 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Then they have a don't ask don't tell policy for incestuals, bestials and ax murderers too. That's rediculous and NOT ture.

You might want to look here for the following BSA offical policy.

The Boy Scouts of America makes no effort to discover the sexual orientation of any member or leader.

The BSA doesn't ask. And if you don't tell (that's the "avowed" part of "[The BSA believes] an avowed homosexual is not a role model for the values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law."), and they don't ask, they have no way of knowing, and you can be a Scouter no matter what your sexual orientation is. It's DADT, just like the military, except that unlike the military the BSA actually follows their own policy.

For example, note this, from www.tompaine.com

The Narragansett Council took the apparently unprecedented step [in 1999] of reinstating an openly homosexual employee. The sixteen year old Eagle Scout had been released from a summer job at Camp Yawgoog and kicked out of Scouting after camp officials asked whether rumors that he was gay were true. The boy said yes. After a public uproar, the council reinstated his Scouting membership and offered his job back, with an okay from BSA, saying it was Scout policy not to ask about employees' sexual orientation -- an action similar to suppressing evidence because the warrant was bad.

You can find references to this on numerous sites. I picked www.tompaine.com because most of them are gay rights sites, and I wanted to find a site you'd believe. But the bottom line is that DADT is official BSA policy.

57 posted on 06/02/2003 2:30:48 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
Next thing you know we will see a degenerate Scout Master in handcuffs as the cops are dragging him away. His excuse will be: "I was just showing the boy how to qualify for his "Camping Merit Badge."
58 posted on 06/02/2003 2:46:39 PM PDT by ex-Texan (primates capitulards toujours en quete de fromage!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
The"HETEROPHOBICS"infiltrated the Boy Scouts and waited for the right moment to do this.Revoke their charter.
59 posted on 06/02/2003 2:58:32 PM PDT by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
From now on it's going to be the "Boyish Scouts" in Philadelphia.

The rest of the country will have Boy Scouts.
60 posted on 06/02/2003 3:01:15 PM PDT by chainsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RRWCC
I've heard that GSA has been taken over by lesbians. Any truth to that claim?
61 posted on 06/02/2003 3:14:13 PM PDT by mrustow (no tag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Real mature. It's hard not to be in awe of your amazing intellect.
62 posted on 06/02/2003 3:41:41 PM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
This has the signature of W. C. Fields all over it.....
63 posted on 06/02/2003 3:54:40 PM PDT by tracer (/b>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
ok, Clinton, I'm audi, and I'll leave you with this (it's a cut n paste and says what I'm thinking right now):

"I don't think FR is for me. As much as I love to read the news from a right perspective, being the good little libertarian I am with my distrust and dislike of Clinton, big government, my desire for local control over community issues, my respect for the Constitution, etc, I don't have any bile or bitterness against fundies at all. Instead, I'm kinda sad, that the movement for all the government principles I hold dear is poisoned from within, by the rabid "Christian" fundamentalist right, paranoid and delusional, and particularly fearful, ignorant and hateful of gay people, it's really unpleasant to watch. I live in NY, where this apoplexy regarding sexuality is a weird oddity, completely disconnected from reality, reason, kindness, civility, etc. It's the Achille's heel of the GOP and in about 10 years, the party will be torn asunder for it. Very sad, when we have a real opportunity to reduce gov't...instead, because of the right's in-fighting and hubris, I see a very strong resurgence of bloated gov't and spending, ridiculous nanny stating from a well-intentioned, yes, but completely misguided left. The thing you fundies have to let go, (though I know you won't, it's so ingrained in your wet apocolyptic dreams, the Second Coming of Christ to save y'all, etc.) is that the future IS a pluralistic society, where, yup, even homosexuals are respected. The world is leaving you behind and y'all are scared, can't deal with, can't move on. So the world will move on without you. Most of us rational people move along with it. You won't. And you will hurt. And you will hurt the future of a Republican party dedicated to the ideals of the Constitution. "

64 posted on 06/02/2003 3:55:40 PM PDT by lurky (being fair)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: KC_for_Freedom
congrads to your son on achieving his Eagle!
65 posted on 06/02/2003 3:59:19 PM PDT by conservcalgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RonF
The Boy Scouts of America makes no effort to discover the sexual orientation of any member or leader.

Incestuals, bestials and ax murderers included. The BSA expects their members to be On Their Honor when it comes to the Oath and Law.

We believe an avowed homosexual is not a role model for the values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law.

You take this to mean that they think unavowed homosexuals, incestuals, bestials and ax murderers are role models for the values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law? That’s silly, illogical and homosexual propaganda because of this:

Scouting's message is compromised when members or leaders present themselves as role models whose actions are inconsistent with the standards set in the Scout Oath and Law.

That’s NOT avowed actions, that’s not about secret actions nor even overt actions, it’s simple about ones behavior as it stands the test of the Oath and Law. It clearly says homosexuals CANNOT serve honorably in the BSA, avowed or not. If you think Baden-Powell ever conceived that homosexuality is compatible with Boy Scouting, that he thought homosexuality is morally straight or reverent in 1916 you’re out of your mind.

66 posted on 06/02/2003 4:21:25 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: lurky
Oh lurky, that's just more pathetic selfish Liberaltarian drivel we’ve come to know and love from you, thanks for not disappointing. To say that behavioral laws for drugs, sodomy, prostitution, euthanasia (sp), et al Liberaltarian causes that are already on the books and have been for years if not centuries somehow makes our society "big government" is laughable. Why don't you work on reducing the welfare roles, over taxation and the pork in new law instead of worrying about a few little laws for a society that were good enough for this country since before you were born.

BTW, nice rant against Conservatives and their desire to constitutionally use the 10th amendment. Oh and I’ve never once used religion in any argument against the practice of perversion. NONE, but nice try.

67 posted on 06/02/2003 4:36:10 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Blessed
As opposed to the perfectly sane world of heterosexual males.

There's a reason there's a huge popularity of "jailbait" styled entertainment out there.
68 posted on 06/02/2003 4:52:04 PM PDT by TheAngryClam (Nil igitur mors est ad nos neque pertinet hilum/quandoquidem natura animi mortalis habetur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mrustow
I've heard that GSA has been taken over by lesbians. Any truth to that claim?

This statement sounds exaggerated at best. But I do know that I would trust my daughter with a lesbian scoutmaster a lot more than I would trust my son with a gay male scoutmaster. There are deep-seated psychological reasons why the scandal was about boys and priests rather than girls and nuns.

I don't favor going out and persecuting gay men, not in the least, but welcoming gay males as BSA volunteers is just asking for trouble.

69 posted on 06/02/2003 4:59:35 PM PDT by Steve Eisenberg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
When we had a single man with NO kids want to be our scout leader, the parents got together to question him.

I asked him why he wanted to do this if he didn't have kids and he told of how much he loved scouting as a kid and wanted to do the same for others.

I don't know that I asked his sexual persuasion but I did tell him that if he messed around with my kid I would KILL him. Not even call the police just take care of it myself. He believed me.

Also he was a great leader, later got married and had a son that later will be a scout too.

70 posted on 06/02/2003 5:00:04 PM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
As a current Troop Committee Chairman and former Scoutmaster, please allow me to subscribe to your remarks thus far in this thread, especially the "get involved, get trained" refrain. This is the only way a troop can sustain itself into the future.

As to the issue at hand, I don't particularly like the current method of providing information for a background check but can't see a real way to provide the desired level of security against pedophiles any other way. I guess I really prefer to have parents providing the leadership under the Safe Scouting/Youth Protection guidelines. Any outsider should be carefully scrutinized before being allowed to work with the youth.

Again, thanks for your Scouting service and well-supported information in this thread.

71 posted on 06/02/2003 5:41:45 PM PDT by T-Bird45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: chainsaw
The 'funding' to the Boy Scouts should be mentioned. If the United Way pulls out they lose $ 85 mil a year (approx.) -Hans Zeiger (author of this commentary) on Laura Inghram show tonight.

72 posted on 06/02/2003 6:05:12 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
What a sad day for America when people cannot leave boys alone to go on a camping trip with some good adult male role models. The charter should be revoked at once. Let them have their gay scouts under another umbrella. Compromise does not work with these people. Cut out the cancer now.
73 posted on 06/02/2003 6:39:19 PM PDT by Raymond Hendrix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Why don't you work on reducing the welfare roles, over taxation and the pork in new law instead of worrying about a few little laws for a society that were good enough for this country since before you were born.

Hey Clint, I'm all down with this stuff, as well as eliminating the vestiges of an era gone by. It's not even that those vestiges are so important to me, it's that they're so CRUCIAL to you and your kin. It says a lot about what kind of people y'all are and the America you envision, (unrealistically), and it ain't pretty.

BTW, nice rant against Conservatives and their desire to constitutionally use the 10th amendment. Oh and I’ve never once used religion in any argument against the practice of perversion. NONE, but nice try.

That's nice, Clint. I think you have a black heart, anyway. You don't even have the decency to denounce the ad hominems that are continually launched against me when this subject comes up. Again, it speaks volumes.

It's just a bulletin board, anyway. I think y'all take it WAY too seriously. Too viciously, also. *shrug*

74 posted on 06/02/2003 6:46:29 PM PDT by lurky (being fair)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Incestuals, bestials and ax murderers included. The BSA expects their members to be On Their Honor when it comes to the Oath and Law.

That's right. And that supports my point.

You take this to mean that they think unavowed homosexuals, incestuals, bestials and ax murderers are role models for the values espoused in the Scout Oath and Law?

Nope. And that's not what I said. I said they can register and be leaders. Whether or not they can be adequate role models is a job for unit sponsors and Scouts' parents to determine. And as you discuss further down below, as long as their behavior is not known to the public or the Scouts, their role as moral example is not compromised. If I don't konw about their behavior, then they can be role models. But, if I know that the type of people you name, all criminals, are in fact engaging in criminal behavior, then I agree that they wouldn't be adequate role models.

So, let's look again at the BSA policy statement you accurately quote:

Scouting's message is compromised when members or leaders present themselves as role models whose actions are inconsistent with the standards set in the Scout Oath and Law.

That’s NOT avowed actionsWhoops. Yes, it is. Every single time the BSA discusses this issue, they state "avowed homosexuals". Why do you think that is?

that’s not about secret actions nor even overt actions, it’s simple about ones behavior as it stands the test of the Oath and Law. It clearly says homosexuals CANNOT serve honorably in the BSA, avowed or not.

No, you'r wrong on BSA policy. BSA National policy clearly and explicitly states that "avowed homosexuals" cannot serve as role models. If they meant all homosexuals, they'd say so. Why do they keep adding the word "avowed" in front of it? Why don't they just say, "homosexuals cannot server as role models"? Because as it states above, it's all about how the leaders present themselves to the youth. The moral example that a leader sets is how they present themselves to the youth. As the BSA makes plain they are aware, if a leader doesn't present themselves in a fashion that provides a proper example, then they can't be leaders. But, if they do present themselves as such, though both their words and behavior, then they can.

The BSA doesn't expect their leaders to be saints. We drink, we smoke, we swear, we might dress up in our spouses' clothing, we might express racial predjudice in a strong and vulgar fashion, we might belong to wife-swapping clubs, we might do who knows what? But if we don't do these things in front of the kids, or so that the kids find out about it, then we are acceptable as leaders to the BSA. Whereas if we do act in such a fashion in front of the kids, or talk about them, then we're out. Because the example we set, the lessons the kids take from us, depend on what the kids see and hear, not what we do that they don't know about.

If you think Baden-Powell ever conceived that homosexuality is compatible with Boy Scouting, that he thought homosexuality is morally straight or reverent in 1916 you’re out of your mind.

I've already stated that I believe nothing of the kind. But in any case, what either you or I think on the matter is irrevelant. We're talking about a public example, not what's between a leader and his God (or wife, or boyfriend, etc.). As BSA policies plainly state.

75 posted on 06/02/2003 7:07:58 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
bump
76 posted on 06/02/2003 7:10:48 PM PDT by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #77 Removed by Moderator

To: BOBWADE
BSA ping
78 posted on 06/02/2003 7:18:08 PM PDT by zip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
I had an unmarried young man want to sign up as a leader. We ran into him during a hike when he was pedaling his bike around the Forest Preserve and saw our uniforms. I went to his house, met his parents, got him to show me his Eagle memento book (Eagles usually get a bunch of congratulatory letters from the President, the Pope, etc.), asked him about his life (school, social, etc.). No mention of girlfriends. I asked; "nobody current". He was just out of school, was working downtown for a company (that I called him at one time to confirm), and was looking to start his own restaurant. We brought him in. And, like we do with every other leader including me, we scrupulously followed Youth Protection policies, never leaving him alone with a youth, etc. The kids loved him. He taught knots, how to cook, light fires, sharpen an ax, etc., and always stuck to the program. He didn't have favorites with the kids, no little presents, no contact outside of Scouting, etc. He finally left to get that restaurant started, and I wish I had more like him.

I've made it a point to meet every coach that both my son and daughter had, shaking their hand, asking a couple of personal questions, showing up for a couple of practices unannounced and helping out, and generally letting them know that this kid had an interested father. I'm 6' 2" and 265 lbs., the rest of the message came though without being explicit.

79 posted on 06/02/2003 7:18:51 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: TheAngryClam
Male homosexuals are somewhere between 1% and 3% of the population.Male on male child molestation represents 30% to 40% of all child molestations.This translates to homosexuals being 10 times more likely to be molesters than hetrosexual males.(this is the same method that is used to assign risk factors for cancer,heart disease or car accidents while talking on a cell phone)

This also seems to be confined to male homosexuals.Lesbians do not seem to be as predatory.
80 posted on 06/02/2003 7:19:19 PM PDT by Blessed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Next thing you know we will see a degenerate Scout Master in handcuffs as the cops are dragging him away. His excuse will be: "I was just showing the boy how to qualify for his "Camping Merit Badge."

There's been plenty of those that were either unconnected to any adult sexual contact, or were married with kids. Keeping gays out won't change this; what's needed is proper supervision of leaders by sponsors and parents.

81 posted on 06/02/2003 7:21:21 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Raymond Hendrix
What a sad day for America when people cannot leave boys alone to go on a camping trip with some good adult male role models.

What will prevent Scouts from going on trips with good adult male role models will not be any policy of the Cradle of Liberty Council. It'll be the lack of good male role model from volunteering as leaders, and from a lack of sponsors and parents from overseeing them.

82 posted on 06/02/2003 7:25:18 PM PDT by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
I guess this just goes to show that at least some in Philly take BROTHERLY LOVE quite literally.....
83 posted on 06/02/2003 7:31:35 PM PDT by TheBattman (Big Brother is closer than you would like to know......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nina0113
we just gave up buying the cookies. I miss Thin Mints terribly.

We quit when GSUSA took part of the proceeds from cookie sales and donated it to ERA support. And I miss Thin Mints terribly also.

84 posted on 06/02/2003 7:32:28 PM PDT by zip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RRWCC
ditto
85 posted on 06/02/2003 7:33:37 PM PDT by zip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RRWCC
Thany you Sir.
86 posted on 06/02/2003 7:33:52 PM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Jorge; Clint N. Suhks
Ping...

WHAT 'Gay Agenda'??

87 posted on 06/02/2003 7:38:09 PM PDT by F16Fighter (Democrats -- The Party of Stalin and Chiraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
The BSA would be able to use their SCOTUS (I keep typing SCOUTS) victories to fight that off, but it would consume time, money, and resources at the local level for a while.

Actually, I believe once the wall comes down the Supreme Court (see how I avoid that problem?) may rule that the Scout Organization is no longer entitled to protection. I believe they won based in part on a fundamental policy not to allow the gay philosophy because it was fundamentally different from the heterosexual philosophy esposed by the BSA. There is a lot of potential for a slipery slope here and I would stand by the national council withdrawing the charters of each and every unit that does accept a gay leader.

88 posted on 06/02/2003 7:38:44 PM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: conservcalgal
Thank you. He went to the time limit but does recognize the value of the honor. to other fathers out there, a little nagging does work on this one.
89 posted on 06/02/2003 7:40:22 PM PDT by KC_for_Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Imagine
I bet you know what I would do.
90 posted on 06/02/2003 7:45:47 PM PDT by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: lurky
Most of us rational people move along with it. You won't. And you will hurt. And you will hurt the future of a Republican party dedicated to the ideals of the Constitution

I see the homo apologists are out again. I guess in your world it's quite rational for men who shove things up their rectum to mentor little boys. Bye.

91 posted on 06/02/2003 7:52:46 PM PDT by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Imagine
When I was a kid, starting about 14 years old and continuing until about 18, homosexuals accosted me over and over again. They came after me in city parks' restrooms, YMCA locker rooms, hitchhiking, movies, but never, never in BSA activities. The Boy Scouts protected me.
The very age of the Boy Scout demographic would mightly appeal to homosexuals. BSA please maintain your moral code against homosexuality.
92 posted on 06/02/2003 7:56:49 PM PDT by born yesterday (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay

"When I heard I finally made Scoutmaster I just broke down and cried..."

93 posted on 06/02/2003 8:11:46 PM PDT by dagnabbit (Who needs a puptent?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
The secular media have refused to draw the obvious connection between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of young men by priests. To the media, such a connection is unsophisticated and even bigoted, e.g., "only a small number of homosexuals are child-abusers - the problem is not homosexuality, but pedophilia."

While I agree that a minority of homosexuals are pedophiles... I still don't think homosexuals belong in positions of authority within the church..and they sure shouldn't be priests.
Church leaders and priests should be examples to young people of the morality taught in the Bible. Same goes for Boy Scout leaders or any an organization that claims Christian values as foundational guidelines.

94 posted on 06/02/2003 8:14:52 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
I guess "Soap On A Rope" is out as one of the gifts in the fund raising box they'll hand out at Christmas this year.
95 posted on 06/02/2003 8:59:23 PM PDT by Doctor Raoul (The "Anti-War Leaders" Have Blood On Their Hands, look and you'll find, they are NOT anti-war)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dyed_in_the_wool
just damn.
96 posted on 06/02/2003 9:14:29 PM PDT by demosthenes the elder (If *I* can afford $5/month to support FR: SO CAN YOU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
The gay agenda is driving this country into the grave.
97 posted on 06/02/2003 11:30:49 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay
If the scouts declare that they are a church/religious organization, can they legally squelch this gay agenda that threatens to bury them?
98 posted on 06/03/2003 12:26:54 AM PDT by Rockitz (After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay; *Homosexual Agenda


99 posted on 06/03/2003 2:18:06 AM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Hi, Ron.

Nice to see a knowledgeable voice speaking up. Good to see you again.

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.

This isn't my impression at all from reading BSA's briefs and press releases during the James Dale case that we discussed ad infinitum with the gays on Salon's "TableTalk" two and three years ago.

BSA National has been forthright: No Gays, no way. What we are discussing here is Blue America's attempts to overthrow the rule by issue creep and what used to be called "salami-slicing".

BSA National may never have admitted it in a court brief or a public statement, but the entire issue has been precisely about pederasty and the gay drive to get at the boys. They've cracked open the schools behind GLSEN and rhetoric about "protecting" students who are (arguably) endogamously gay and profess themselves to be gay; but the struggle isn't about self-identifying gays, it's about developing pubescent sexuality and the fact that pederasts know that they can impress unformed youth into accommodating sexual partnerships regardless of gender identity. I would further suggest that such partnerships, formed outside society's bounds of approval, are the reason why the gay activists at the American Psychiatric Association eventually took down the term "ego-dystonic homosexuality" for such accommodations, because of the imputation that there was something unhealthy about accommodative homosex. There is, but the activists won't admit it, and instead wage war on anyone who thinks there might be.

Thus GLSEN propagates an essentialist line on gender identity, for polemical effect, which the practical experience of the gay community shows is untrue. At these ages, young people's sexual orientation is mutable and susceptible to interference by aggressive homosexual adults -- which I submit is the whole ball game, and precisely what the Youth Protection program is all about. So to say is not to say that heterosexuals do not behave badly, but simply to acknowledge what gays themselves know but will not honestly admit, that gay men in particular are more of a problem where youth contact is involved. Man-for-man, they are markedly more likely to act out even than married heterosexual peds, who are the largest group of bad actors.

As for the essentialist roorback itself, that children "born gay" will inevitably "become gay" and that the community shouldn't, by further implication, interfere with the efforts of adult gays to contact "their own" youth to support, protect and "counsel" them, we can profitably reread the demurrer of Charles Socarides et al. on gender identity and essentialism:

Gender Identity

It is a matter of professional responsibility to correct certain statements made by Lawrence Newman, M.D. in the December 5 article, “Children With Gender-Identity Disorder Benefit From Early Psychiatric Intervention.”

To his credit, Dr. Newman urges compassion and kindliness toward children with a disturbance in gender-defined sexual identity. He accurately states that such a condition leads to a lifelong disturbance in an individual’s relationship with himself and with others, as well as producing isolation, depression, and anxiety in a prehomosexual child as he grows from childhood into adolescence and later adulthood. He announces correctly, but with apparent unconcern over this dire development, that such children, of course, will “develop a homosexual orientation in later life.” But he makes no reference to the possibility of the reversal of this condition, while, in actuality, there are multiple case reports now appearing in the literature attesting to its reversibility.

He bases this assertion on a mysterious “landmark long-term study”-without citing it-that there is “no known therapy which could change this probability.” This is completely erroneous and misleading, both to parents and to the child, as well as to the multitude of readers of Psychiatric News worldwide.

We cite, for example, Edward Glover’s report (1960 Portman Clinic Survey), a fact-gathering committee report of the American Psychoanalytic Association (1956), the Bieber et al. report (1962), and the findings of Socarides (1978, 1997). He has completely disregarded the MacIntosh report (1994) published in the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association (1995) that in a responsive survey of 285 psychoanalysts who reported having analyzed 1,250 homosexual patients, 23 percent changed to heterosexuality from homosexuality and that 85 percent had significantly benefited from therapy. The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality report of 1997 confirms MacIntosh’s study.

We take exception to Dr. Newman’s attitude that parents disturbed over this development are “homophobic” -- an erroneous term (for it does not meet the criteria of phobia) coined by the gay movement to stigmatize all parents who disapprove of this condition, for no parent ever raises a child to be a homosexual.

Tolerance, compassion, and understanding of both child and parents, along with a recommendation for psychoanalytic therapy, should be the position of dedicated and responsible psychiatrists.

One’s compassion for the plight of the prehomosexual child and his parents, the child’s own responsiveness as a patient, and his value as a human being lead to a mutuality of gratitude and satisfaction between child, parent, and therapist that well justifies the commitment to the alleviation of this important and serious disorder. It is no kindness to children with a gender-identity disorder disturbance in gender-defined self—identity-a precursor to adult homosexuality and other sexual deviations-to suggest that this condition should be not only accepted but embraced by both the patient and his family.

Charles W. Socarides, M.D.
New York, N.Y.

For:

Abraham Freedman, M.D., Philadelphia, Pa.
Harold Voth, M.D., Topeka, Kan.
C. Downing Tait, M.D., Atlanta, Ga.
Benjamin Kaufman, M.D., Sacramento, Calif.

From NARTH's site.

It seems to me, as an outsider, that BSA's best course of action now is to step up and 1) reaffirm the "no gays" policy that they defended before the Supreme Court, 2) explain that the policy is an integral part of the YP program, 3) restate the need for the YP program, and 4) state for the record that yes, the gay ban is about pederasty and the disproportionate tendency among gay men to participate in, or wink at, pederastic abuse of youths, inasmuch as it is visited not just on gay youth, but on all youth indiscriminately.

Gays who brag in private about their exploits with teenaged boys and "skinning some chicken" cannot then expect to be believed in the forum when they profess with a straight face that their concern for youth protection is the equal of the rest of the community's. The record of scandals and abuses, not just with the Catholic Church but generally, shows that this is just not so. It's high time that BSA grasped that nettle and pulled it up.

As an aside, it would have made a difference to me, if gay leadership at e.g. HRC and GLSEN and PFLAG had rung down interdicts of the most wrathful punishment on pederasts and pedophiles generally, and professed publicly a promise and pledge of fidelity to the community's sensitivities about young people and sexuality. But they have not done this, and so far as I can see, even from the chitchat on "TableTalk", they remain in solidarity with, and secret or even public admirers of, gay men who succeed in introducing formative teenagers to homosex as their first significant sexual experience.

What we have here, Ron, is you guys on the one hand trying to maintain the YP program, and these other people acting in bad faith to break it down.

My two cents.

100 posted on 06/03/2003 3:14:46 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-112 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson